How far fetched is the idea of a Canon EVIL DSLR style camera?

AV Janus · Mar 9, 2010

I know that this might be blasphemy to some of the guys out here, but please share your thoughts.

IMO It would be a smart move on Canons part to introduce a APS-C sensor sized camera as an addition to their entry level DSLR range.

Most people considering to buy their first DSLR are often looking at various features.

And most of us are not hooked on OVF so much but are used to other features and can live with a product that is different than traditional DSLR in that and other regards.

Such a camera should be cheaper (in some way) to produce.
I don't say it should be cheaper than current offerings. Not even smaller.

Just lose the mirror and retain lenses compatibility! emoticon - smile

I would love to see a Canon hybrid made from best modern features on newly announced Panasonic G2 and Samsung NX10.

The key to success, IMO would be retaining lens compatibility for the body while offering great APS-C IQ and adding modern features new buyers have become used to and will like to experince at the whole new level!

What are your thoughts on this?
It seems hard that Canon isn't thinking about this, IMO.

Lemming51 · Mar 9, 2010

AV Janus said:
What are your thoughts on this?

Compared to the T2i/550D, the NX10 is 20mm thinner but with a less comfortable grip and worse viewfinder. The EOS already does live view, including AF, for anyone wanting to use it that way. An EVIL EOS that retained EF/EF-S lens compatibility would either be just as large (requiring the 44mm flange to sensor distance), or if made thin like NX10 and micro 4/3 it'd need an entirely new set of lenses ($$$) and an fat adapter to use the current EF/EF-S lenses.

AV Janus said:
It seems hard that Canon isn't thinking about this, IMO.

As far as I can tell, neither is Nikon, Sony, or Pentax.

brightcolours · Mar 9, 2010

AV Janus said:
I know that this might be blasphemy to some of the guys out here, but please share your thoughts.

IMO It would be a smart move on Canons part to introduce a APS-C sensor sized camera as an addition to their entry level DSLR range.

Most people considering to buy their first DSLR are often looking at various features.

And most of us are not hooked on OVF so much but are used to other features and can live with a product that is different than traditional DSLR in that and other regards.

Such a camera should be cheaper (in some way) to produce.
I don't say it should be cheaper than current offerings. Not even smaller.
Just lose the mirror and retain lenses compatibility! emoticon - smile

I would love to see a Canon hybrid made from best modern features on newly announced Panasonic G2 and Samsung NX10.

The key to success, IMO would be retaining lens compatibility for the body while offering great APS-C IQ and adding modern features new buyers have become used to and will like to experince at the whole new level!

What are your thoughts on this?
It seems hard that Canon isn't thinking about this, IMO.

DSLR is NOT EVIL.

If you strip the camera from its mirror, two things happen.

NO phase detect AF anymore. So, say byebye to good focus tracking.
NO 100% compatibility with the existing range of EF mount lenses anymore. Because they have motors and electronics/logic designed for and around the phase detect AF module commands. So, just like all other EVIL cameras, there will have to be a new line of lenses, and there might be a very limited back wards compatibility (or non at all, depending on the choice the designers would make).

So. Out of the window, your retaining lens compatibility. Just like with Olympus. And just like Sony's EVIL plans. And just like the Sigma and Leica compacts that chose to have an integrated lens, rather than being compatible with their existing lens range (and then having to introduce a new lens range).

Will Canon at some point come with a compact camera with its own new line of exchangeable lenses? Maybe. But do understand the lens/phase detect AF issue.

brightcolours · Mar 9, 2010

Lemming51 said:
Lemming51 said:

What are your thoughts on this?

Click to expand...

Compared to the T2i/550D, the NX10 is 20mm thinner but with a less comfortable grip and worse viewfinder. The EOS already does live view, including AF, for anyone wanting to use it that way. An EVIL EOS that retained EF/EF-S lens compatibility would either be just as large (requiring the 44mm flange to sensor distance), or if made thin like NX10 and micro 4/3 it'd need an entirely new set of lenses ($$$) and an fat adapter to use the current EF/EF-S lenses.

Lemming51 said:

It seems hard that Canon isn't thinking about this, IMO.

Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, neither is Nikon, Sony, or Pentax.

Sony is

WilbaW · Mar 9, 2010

brightcolours said:
NO 100% compatibility with the existing range of EF mount lenses anymore. Because they have motors and electronics/logic designed for and around the phase detect AF module commands. So, just like all other EVIL cameras, there will have to be a new line of lenses, and there might be a very limited back wards compatibility (or non at all, depending on the choice the designers would make).

Just stating for the record that I can't find any evidence, and brighcolours won't provide any, that supports the idea of incompatible protocols causing slow contrast-detect AF with DSLRs.

On the other hand, there is some evidence for the idea that fast CD AF requires higher power in the focus motor than is generally available in lenses designed for phase-detect AF SLRs ( http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1031&message=33729687 ).

So even though I disagree with brightcolours about why current lenses might be too slow for an EVIL Canon to be practical, I agree that that's probably true.

neweossie · Mar 9, 2010

And today I'll pick up my 550D...

I am 57 and use reading glasses, so using the LCD screen means I must wear my glasses... The G1's EVF doesn't compare with the pentamirror, especially in bright sunny outdoors.

The battery life is way too short, hardly a day, below 300 shots, even with the LCD off. I managed to keep one xxxD battery for nearly a week on some of my treks..

G1 size was a disappointment too.. If you mount a substantial zoom it is hardly smaller than an xxxD body with the same lens.

This being said I'll follow the EVIL development with interest. I think EVIL has still to come of age, and we may get some very interesting products in a few years time.

Oohh forgot to mention the price issue. The whole Olympus and Panasonic bodies and accessories ranges are grossly overpriced. Usual tactics of letting the early enthusiastic consumer pay for the development of a new concept.

mailman88 · Mar 9, 2010

...I hear here you. Canon does the same with accessories like batteries and lens. They hook you first with the body and hope you spend 3x times more on extra gear. I have in total value, doubled in lens compared to my bodies. Canon loves my wallet.

brightcolours · Mar 10, 2010

WilbaW said:
brightcolours said:

NO 100% compatibility with the existing range of EF mount lenses anymore. Because they have motors and electronics/logic designed for and around the phase detect AF module commands. So, just like all other EVIL cameras, there will have to be a new line of lenses, and there might be a very limited back wards compatibility (or non at all, depending on the choice the designers would make).

Click to expand...

Just stating for the record that I can't find any evidence, and brighcolours won't provide any, that supports the idea of incompatible protocols causing slow contrast-detect AF with DSLRs.

On the other hand, there is some evidence for the idea that fast CD AF requires higher power in the focus motor than is generally available in lenses designed for phase-detect AF SLRs ( http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1031&message=33729687 ).

So even though I disagree with brightcolours about why current lenses might be too slow for an EVIL Canon to be practical, I agree that that's probably true.

You disagree without reason, and you are totally annoying for every time posting this nonsense to any of my posts.

It would be nice is you could/would actually use your brain and thing about things a bit. How is it that motors that can have lenses move so fast with phase detect AF that you can actually shoot 10 frames per second, AND track focus between each shot, would not be powerful enough to move multiple times per second?

Especially in the knowledge that phase detect AF moves the lens multiple times itself, to focus.

Put your camera on AI servo for a change.

AV Janus · Mar 10, 2010

I read somewhere on this forum that Canon themselves said contrast AF speed is software issue and they are working on improving that.
I heard NX10 has a pretty decent AF, so it can be done!
Lens compatibility doesn't have to be FULL legacy, IMO.

I think they are thinking about it, but probably see little need for it now.

Question is how long will Canon wait to release such a model and how carefully will they target it to the wanted market!

They probably just think it would be easier just to add some gimmicks to the entry level EOS in the future, than risk dropping the DSLR crowd.

WilbaW · Mar 10, 2010

brightcolours said:
WilbaW said:

brightcolours said:

NO 100% compatibility with the existing range of EF mount lenses anymore. Because they have motors and electronics/logic designed for and around the phase detect AF module commands. So, just like all other EVIL cameras, there will have to be a new line of lenses, and there might be a very limited back wards compatibility (or non at all, depending on the choice the designers would make).

Click to expand...

Just stating for the record that I can't find any evidence, and brighcolours won't provide any, that supports the idea of incompatible protocols causing slow contrast-detect AF with DSLRs.

On the other hand, there is some evidence for the idea that fast CD AF requires higher power in the focus motor than is generally available in lenses designed for phase-detect AF SLRs ( http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1031&message=33729687 ).

So even though I disagree with brightcolours about why current lenses might be too slow for an EVIL Canon to be practical, I agree that that's probably true.

Click to expand...

You disagree without reason, ...

Explicit reasons and reasoning given, with sources. You've only ever given unsubstantiated opinion. Oh, and abuse.

brightcolours said:
... and you are totally annoying for every time posting this nonsense to any of my posts.

If you stop posting fantasy as fact you'll not be bothered by me. When you're asked for evidence, provide it - makes you look well shonky when you reply with evasion and insults.

brightcolours said:
It would be nice is you could/would actually use your brain and thing about things a bit. How is it that motors that can have lenses move so fast with phase detect AF that you can actually shoot 10 frames per second, AND track focus between each shot, would not be powerful enough to move multiple times per second?

Easy. Power is the product of force and speed, so if you want to exert a large force at a high frequency you need a lot of power. Tracking a moving subject wouldn't necessarily require a lot of either, but accurate high acceleration over short distances at a reasonable frequency does require considerable force. This situation is more like the root mean square power rating of audio amplifiers (for transient response), than like the mechanical power rating of engines (for sustained output).

brightcolours said:
Especially in the knowledge that phase detect AF moves the lens multiple times itself, to focus.

Not starting and stopping as described in the imaging resources article ( http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1217960634.html ) -

"With contrast-detect autofocus though, the lens has to move multiple times, and must come to rest before the camera can take each 'look' at the subject, to determine whether the focus is better or worse than it was at the previous focal setting. In order for the overall focus cycle to be performed quickly, the lens needs to be able to shift focal settings very quickly, multiple times per second. This is a demanding requirement, and not all lenses will be up to the challenge. Olympus offers contrast-detect AF on some of their recent SLRs, but the feature only works with certain lenses that have focus motors both strong and fast enough to slew the lens elements to a new position very quickly. Other manufacturers offer contrast-detect AF that works with any of their lenses, but at the cost of very slow AF times. (It's for this reason that Nikon refers to the contrast detect AF option in their SLRs as 'tripod mode.')"

That raises an interesting thought - CD AF could be fast with current lenses if the measurement of contrast could be done "continuously", while the focus mechanism is in motion, as it can be done with phase difference. Maybe that's what jsmiller's conversation with a Canon Senior Service Supervisor was about ( http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1031&message=34729749 ).

brightcolours said:
Put your camera on AI servo for a change.

Intuition won't get you very far with this kind of thing. Unless you have something like a degree in engineering, you would not be able to understand much of what's involved, except at a vague conceptual level.

brightcolours · Mar 10, 2010

You are wrong in many areas.

AF tracking DOES require starting, stopping, moving front and back ALL THE TIME. And it does so at a high "frequency".
Contrast AF detect DOES require the lens motors to stop and make QUICK steps, either forward or backward.
It is totally nonsensical to state/think that in micro 4/3rds and compact cameras there would be "powerful motors" and to think that the motors built in DSLR lenses would somehow be less "powerful". I also have not heard of an abysmal battery time for compact cameras and micro 4/3rds cameras. One would need a lot more energy to get faster than DSLR AF motor responses, you know. It does not get much more fast and powerful than USM ring motors.

You can post links to nonsense all you want, just because someone other than me wrote them down does not make it sensible. Like I said before, using your brain never hurt.

It really is not hard to understand that the commands given with phase detection AF are very different to commands given for contrast detection AF. And that therefore it is really also not hard to imagine the electronics, pin signal layout and implemented commands in DSLR AF systems are not optimal to cater for faster contrast detect AF.

Now can you please let your silly posts and attacks on me rest? Thank you.

brightcolours · Mar 10, 2010

AV Janus said:
I read somewhere on this forum that Canon themselves said contrast AF speed is software issue and they are working on improving that.

Yes, you can read a lot of things. Also a lot of misinterpreted things. Also old rehashed things.

Some supposed Canon source said, after the introduction of the Canon EOS 450D, that they would work to get contrast AF detect faster.

That was almost 2 years ago, since then the Canon EOS 5D mk II, EOS 50D, EOS 500D, EOS 7D, EOS 1D mk IV and EOS 550D have been developed/introduced.

Do we see a speed increase? Yes, for sure. The contrast detection AF of for instance the 7D and 550D is faster than that of the 450D.

Does it in any way approach phase detect AF speed, or even the Panasonic G1 AF speed? No, not at all.

Might I AGIAN point out the fact that Sony does NOT even offer contrast detect AF. That Nikon also does not have a fast(er) contrast detect AF. That Olympus also does not have a fast contrast detect AF with its 4/3rds DSLRs. That Pentax also does not have a fast contrast detect AF.

So only Panasonic, and to lesser extent Olympus, have a reasonably fast contrast detect AF in micro 4/3rds non-DSLR but exchangeable lens system cameras. Not with the DSLR lenses, but with a newly developed mount and standard.

AV Janus said:
I heard NX10 has a pretty decent AF, so it can be done!

What can be done? Is the NX10 a DSLR? No. Does the NX10 use lenses designed for a phase detect AF DSLR? No.

The Samsung NX10, just like micro 4/3rds, uses a new mount with a newly designed protocol/electronics.

AV Janus said:
Lens compatibility doesn't have to be FULL legacy, IMO.

So that will just mean that you will NOT get super fast AF with lenses designed for the current EF mount for phase detect AF. Just what I have been saying.

Your original post however did wonder about the possibility of full legacy support. And that is what I am discussing.

OF COURSE it is possible to make a camera without mirror box, have the newly developed lenses sit closer to the sensor than the EF/EF-S mount lenses, and have the EF/EF-S lenses mount with an extension tube that will put them at the distance of the sensor they are designed for. But that will NOT make them AF with a contrast detect AF system as fast as lenses with electronics especially designed for a contrast AF system.

AV Janus said:
I think they are thinking about it, but probably see little need for it now.

Question is how long will Canon wait to release such a model and how carefully will they target it to the wanted market!

They probably just think it would be easier just to add some gimmicks to the entry level EOS in the future, than risk dropping the DSLR crowd.

I do NOT understand why you think the mirror is something bad.

If Canon develops a compact system, that will NOT be in place of EOS DSLRs. It will be next to is, just like the compact digital camera line.

Might I add that Canon has been developing and producing digital compact cameras for almost a decade now, all of which use contrast detect AF via the imaging sensor, and all of which either use weaker normal motors are stronger silent USM ring type motors.

Sony also has produced compact digital cameras for MANY years, with contrast detect AF. As has Nikon.

So it has NOTHING to do with the ability of these companies to make contrast detect AF systems that work reasonably fast. Nothing what so ever. It also has nothing to do with the type of motors used.

007peter · Mar 10, 2010

brightcolours said:
AV Janus said:

Most people considering to buy their first DSLR are often looking at various features. And most of us are not hooked on OVF so much but are used to other features and can live with a product that is different than traditional DSLR in that and other regards.

Click to expand...

brightcolours said:
DSLR is NOT EVIL

Agree, but that is NOT the ARGUMENT. From my own experience as well as observe many newbie DSLR buyers. I have concluded that:

Most people buy DSLR to shoot their children
Most people don't give a damn about OVF
Most people rather compose using LCD
Most people don't aspire to be a professional photographer
Most people don't care to learned about photography
Most people don't participate in DPR, photographic forum
Most people never bought a 2nd. lens
Most people don't pixel-pick or worrying about front/back focus
Most people think current DSLR is too bulky, heavy, and expensive
Most people want a smaller, lighter DSLR that is less expensive.

These people are your everyday Mom, Dad, Grandparents, Sister, Brothers, Aunts, Uncles, etc. A canon EVIL would served them better than a canon DSLR . I myself also bought a DSLR rather reluctantly. I don't care for the size nor the price of a DSLR. All I wanted was something with better HIGH ISO and DSLR was my only choice . If Canon makes an EVIL, buyers like me would have chose to skip out of DSLR all together.

For example, I just got back from taking the Sky Lantern Festival in Pingxi, Taiwan . While there are many DSLR users, majority of people used Point/Shoot, and wanted something that they can composed using LCD. Sony A300/A350/A330/A380/A500/A550 are big seller here for that reason alone.

brightcolours said:

Franz Weber · Mar 10, 2010

The one most important reason why I bought my first DSLR some years ago was good High ISO performance. So an apsc or (think about it) fulframe EVIL would have served me on this.

But after beeing acusstomed to DSLRs for some years I like the (stabilized) OVF.

--
allways look on the bright side of live!

brightcolours · Mar 10, 2010

I love it when you quote one line, totally taking it out of context. Great job of making a useless response.

You cut out both the OP's post and my post, only leaving 2 totally non-related sentences.

The OP's post was about how nice it would be to have a camera without mirror but which retains lens compatibility.

My post was about how, by getting rid of the mirror and mirror box, you can NOT keep (reasonable) lens compatibility. (ie: you will keep the too slow contrast AF performance with the old lenses).

I pointed out what the mirror actually is for, AF wise.

And then you come with your rant. Great.

As if I was talking about that everyone needs or wants a DSLR. I was certainly NOT talking about that.

This is the 2nd time this week I get a post from you like this. Accident? Coincidence? Or for some reason just trying to argue about anything I post?

AV Janus · Mar 10, 2010

I apologize for by layman approach to this issue. I'm just thinking out loud trying to learn from others.

Personally I only care about lens compatibility issue if they or some 3rd party vendor are releasing the new lens at a slooow pace.

If there were like 20 lens available upon release and at competitive prices compared to current lens, I would have no problem with it.

Luckily I'm in position where any system i buy i will have to buy all the lenses.

From my amateur/new user POV that means that i have to cross reference VERY large number of infos to make my decision.

DSLR offers almost everything I want, and new 550D with all its available lenses and accessories might be the best bet.

BUT having a similar EVIL that does most things equal but in a different way while offering more consumer friendly approach, appeals to me because I can hand that kind of camera to a person beside me to take a photos, and not worry that 95% of them will be a total mess of blurriness.

These cameras might do better in such situations were people using them don't have the needed time to learn to operate DSLR and practice, practice, practice:

G2 = Great, but lenses expensive, 2x crop is bad for traveling lite with one superzoom lens + there is no such lens. M43 is no APS-C in high isos, and I want my indoor pics to be without flash and clean as they can be!

NX10 = Great in almost all regards, people even taunt its AF as being fast. Only thing missing for my first buy list would be a lens that would match something like Tamron 18-250(270!)

There must be people out there who wished they haven't bought their DSLRs, because they didn't take good pics with them OUTB!

Those people will appreciate companies effort into offering a camera with DSLR IQ but parted with most of SLR legacy band excelling in ease of taking great shots in mostly Auto mode!

Retaining lens compatibility would only work in Canon/Nikon's favor cause everybody makes those lens!

That is the one thing they have that nobody else can match! Choices are plenty and prices are "good"

If they cant do that, than they are in the same boat as all makers of these new systems!

In that case making 550D even smarter and more packed with features like touchscreen oriented gimmick features, articulating display, AMOLED, Great and smart Auto mode, Improved Live View, faster contrast AF is far better option for them!

Improving contrast AF should be the main priority IMO. Once it is acceptable to a new buyer not to notice, than they can always keep the the size as it is, loose the mirror, stick in a good EVF, save some money on R&D and marketing and call it a EVIL!

007peter · Mar 10, 2010

I feel sorry you feel my last response was an argument against you. It is not. Take a look over what I'm saying with a cooler head. I wrote that with the intention to express my opinion about a canon EVIL. Nothing less, nothing more. It was never meant as a direct refutation . It was just a comment on EVIL. Take it easy, why are you taking this post so personally???

brightcolours said:
I love it when you quote one line, totally taking it out of context. Great job of making a useless response. You cut out both the OP's post and my post, only leaving 2 totally non-related sentences.

Like I say, I do so because I'm not writing a direct refutation to your point. I do this with all my post. I'm not trying to QUOTE per se. Just to give reader enough clue to what we're talking about.

brightcolours said:
The OP's post was about how nice it would be to have a camera without mirror but which retains lens compatibility.

But you read his post carefully, he also asked people response with your opinion . I'm expression mine. Sorry if you dont' like mine, but I too am entitled to my own opinion. After all the original poster said:

brightcolours said:
brightcolours said:

AV Janus wrote:
What are your thoughts on this?

Click to expand...

brightcolours said:
My post was about how, by getting rid of the mirror and mirror box, you can NOT keep (reasonable) lens compatibility. (ie: you will keep the too slow contrast AF performance with the old lenses).

I pointed out what the mirror actually is for, AF wise.

And then you come with your rant. Great.

Again, take a look over with cooler head. My assertion was no way a rant.

brightcolours said:
As if I was talking about that everyone needs or wants a DSLR. I was certainly NOT talking about that.

This is the 2nd time this week I get a post from you like this. Accident? Coincidence? Or for some reason just trying to argue about anything I post?

Please ignore my post if you feel that way. I doubt anyone reading my last post taking it as a direct challenge to you. Good day

WilbaW · Mar 10, 2010

brightcolours said:
You are wrong in many areas.

AF tracking DOES require starting, stopping, moving front and back ALL THE TIME. And it does so at a high "frequency".

I don't dispute that a moving subject can require that behaviour from AI Servo. The fundamental difference as I understand it is that a phase difference is effectively a continuous signal - it does not require the focus mechanism to stop for every discrete measurement, like a CD AF system does (as described in the imaging resources article).

brightcolours said:
Contrast AF detect DOES require the lens motors to stop and make QUICK steps, either forward or backward.

That's right, you can see your focus ring jittering in Live View Live mode.

brightcolours said:
It is totally nonsensical to state/think that in micro 4/3rds and compact cameras there would be "powerful motors" and to think that the motors built in DSLR lenses would somehow be less "powerful".

You need to do better than state that "it is totally nonsensical", for instance, provide some evidence (credible documents, observations, experiments... that can be independently verified). It sounds like you're utterly convinced you're right and nothing that doesn't fit will be considered.

brightcolours said:
I also have not heard of an abysmal battery time for compact cameras and micro 4/3rds cameras. One would need a lot more energy to get faster than DSLR AF motor responses, you know.

Is there a CD AF camera that gets faster than DSLR PD AF?

brightcolours said:
It does not get much more fast and powerful than USM ring motors.

I think you're still confusing the kind of power you need for sustained speed and the kind of power you need for precise stepping at high frequency. (You do understand the physics definition of power, yeah?)

brightcolours said:
You can post links to nonsense all you want, just because someone other than me wrote them down does not make it sensible. Like I said before, using your brain never hurt.

Right! Nonsense is by definition anything you don't agree with.

brightcolours said:
It really is not hard to understand that the commands given with phase detection AF are very different to commands given for contrast detection AF. And that therefore it is really also not hard to imagine the electronics, pin signal layout and implemented commands in DSLR AF systems are not optimal to cater for faster contrast detect AF.

Please let me know when you have some evidence. (I'm not much interested in unsubstantiated guesswork based on dubious assumptions. Intuition and common sense won't get you very far in understanding complex systems.)

brightcolours said:
Now can you please let your silly posts and attacks on me rest? Thank you.

If you stop posting fantasy as fact I will have to stop challenging it. You can still give opinions like, "because they have motors and electronics/logic designed for and around the phase detect AF module commands", but you must put something like "I guess it is..." in front of it to identify it as such. If you have good evidence you must be ready and willing to provide it.

WilbaW · Mar 10, 2010

brightcolours said:
AV Janus said:

I read somewhere on this forum that Canon themselves said contrast AF speed is software issue and they are working on improving that.

Click to expand...

Yes, you can read a lot of things. Also a lot of misinterpreted things. Also old rehashed things.

Some supposed Canon source said, after the introduction of the Canon EOS 450D, that they would work to get contrast AF detect faster.

That was almost 2 years ago, since then the Canon EOS 5D mk II, EOS 50D, EOS 500D, EOS 7D, EOS 1D mk IV and EOS 550D have been developed/introduced.

Do we see a speed increase? Yes, for sure. The contrast detection AF of for instance the 7D and 550D is faster than that of the 450D.

Does it in any way approach phase detect AF speed, or even the Panasonic G1 AF speed? No, not at all.

Might I AGIAN point out the fact that Sony does NOT even offer contrast detect AF. That Nikon also does not have a fast(er) contrast detect AF. That Olympus also does not have a fast contrast detect AF with its 4/3rds DSLRs. That Pentax also does not have a fast contrast detect AF.

So only Panasonic, and to lesser extent Olympus, have a reasonably fast contrast detect AF in micro 4/3rds non-DSLR but exchangeable lens system cameras. Not with the DSLR lenses, but with a newly developed mount and standard.

brightcolours said:

I heard NX10 has a pretty decent AF, so it can be done!

Click to expand...

What can be done? Is the NX10 a DSLR? No. Does the NX10 use lenses designed for a phase detect AF DSLR? No.

The Samsung NX10, just like micro 4/3rds, uses a new mount with a newly designed protocol/electronics.

brightcolours said:

Lens compatibility doesn't have to be FULL legacy, IMO.

Click to expand...

So that will just mean that you will NOT get super fast AF with lenses designed for the current EF mount for phase detect AF. Just what I have been saying.

Your original post however did wonder about the possibility of full legacy support. And that is what I am discussing.

OF COURSE it is possible to make a camera without mirror box, have the newly developed lenses sit closer to the sensor than the EF/EF-S mount lenses, and have the EF/EF-S lenses mount with an extension tube that will put them at the distance of the sensor they are designed for. But that will NOT make them AF with a contrast detect AF system as fast as lenses with electronics especially designed for a contrast AF system.

brightcolours said:

I think they are thinking about it, but probably see little need for it now.

Question is how long will Canon wait to release such a model and how carefully will they target it to the wanted market!

They probably just think it would be easier just to add some gimmicks to the entry level EOS in the future, than risk dropping the DSLR crowd.

Click to expand...

I do NOT understand why you think the mirror is something bad.

If Canon develops a compact system, that will NOT be in place of EOS DSLRs. It will be next to is, just like the compact digital camera line.

Might I add that Canon has been developing and producing digital compact cameras for almost a decade now, all of which use contrast detect AF via the imaging sensor, and all of which either use weaker normal motors are stronger silent USM ring type motors.

Sony also has produced compact digital cameras for MANY years, with contrast detect AF. As has Nikon.

So it has NOTHING to do with the ability of these companies to make contrast detect AF systems that work reasonably fast. Nothing what so ever. It also has nothing to do with the type of motors used.

For the record - all the usual challenges. :-D

Peter 13 · Mar 10, 2010

Most people buy P&S. What is your point?

How far fetched is the idea of a Canon EVIL DSLR style camera?

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Active member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts