Would a new Canon Mirrorless ILC System replace the EOS System?

You have had your say and I have disagreed with you. Leave it alone. It's not up to you to repeatedly badger an other forum member regarding in what forum I chose to post. Remember you are a member here and not a Forum Moderator. So even if you have the opinion that I am posting in the wrong forum you are allowed to state that but there are rules for repeated badgering and you are breaking that rule at this point. Take a look around this thread, out of all the responders you are the only froum member with your point of view.

Allow the people in the FF IDs, ID and 5D/5DII foum an opportunity to read my OP and if they wish to respond with thier opinion regarding a possible Canon mirrorless ILC System. Stop trying to force me to talk with people in the regular Canon Talk Forum who as far as I can see have little interest in a FF camera or an interchangeable lens camera system.

Vibrio said:

it is for canon talk which is what you are posting about since there is no such thing as a FF ILC system.
your post is not relavent in this forum.

Peter Nelson said:

I went ahead and visted the Canon Talk Forum and after looking at all the threads there I am not interested in posting my question to them. There was nothing at all about a FF digital Canon camera. That forum is for p&s and it's obvious to everyone. I will not catorgorize a FF mirrorless camera system using quility interchangeable lenses along with p&s cameras, nor would I expect the p&s users to have an appreciation of FF ILC systems.

I also looked up FFS and there were a very many different explanations none were usefull.

BTW I did not appreciate your general tone in your reply, then following up on that instead of simply answering my question about FFS you go on to tell me to go and goggle it. It would have been more direct and faster for you to have simply typed a few words answering my question about the meaning of FFS since it was you in the first place that brought it up.

BTW this is Canon's FF digital camera forum and as stated early on I'm interested in the opinions of the people who frequent here about a possible new FF Canon mirrorless camera system. So you and I disagree on where I should make my inquiries on this subject. These reasons alone are enough for me to ignore your repeated replies that which keep telling me to post some where else.

Vibrio said:

wither you are a retired photographer or an escapee from a mental institution with or without a huge investment in camera gear this is a forum for discussing the 5d/1d series camers. if you want to talk about hypothetical cameras use the canon talk forum.

Peter Nelson said:

I do not know what the leters FFS imply at all, could you clarify?

Also, just to be clear to you. I, as a retired Pro Photographer who had my own business for a short while and still has a huge investment in Pro Gear from the 1DsMkII and 10 "L" lenses as well as Pro Nikon Gear and Pro Kodak gear and Pro Leica gear- I wish to talk to the people in this forum. But thank you for your opinion.
-Peter

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

you said EOS system , still the wrong forum.

pointing out you are posting in the wrong forum is not badgering

Peter Nelson said:

You have had your say and I have disagreed with you. Leave it alone. It's not up to you to repeatedly badger an other forum member regarding in what forum I chose to post. Remember you are a member here and not a Forum Moderator. So even if you have the opinion that I am posting in the wrong forum you are allowed to state that but there are rules for repeated badgering and you are breaking that rule at this point. Take a look around this thread, out of all the responders you are the only froum member with your point of view.

Allow the people in the FF IDs, ID and 5D/5DII foum an opportunity to read my OP and if they wish to respond with thier opinion regarding a possible Canon mirrorless ILC System. Stop trying to force me to talk with people in the regular Canon Talk Forum who as far as I can see have little interest in a FF camera or an interchangeable lens camera system.

Vibrio said:

it is for canon talk which is what you are posting about since there is no such thing as a FF ILC system.
your post is not relavent in this forum.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

As you say it becomes even more of a problem when you factor in multiple lenses.

The main thing agenst it is I'd say that FF might not mean alot to many ammature buyers, just look at how well the 7D has sold. I suspect its more likely Canon will go after the crop market instead which does seem to have a few gaps...

1.A changeble lens system with slr functionality that really pushes megapixels, 18-20 would put Canon well ahead of Sony and Panasonic and would I'd guess tempt alot of potential/current SLR buyers.

2.A fixed lens camera similar to the X1 or X100 with a zoom. This actually seems like the biggest gap in the market to me, the two releases we have are both targetting the fairly small retro street shooter camera market. If Canon put out an 18 megapixel release with a recent general purpose lens I think it would sell very well.

Well I surly did not mean to imply having more lenses would be a problem, especially if they are very small lenses. Heck, I'd rather carry 4 or 5 or even 6 small lenses any day than 5 or 6 of my Canon L lenses. Say 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and 135mm. With a possible 20mm as well. Alol primes. This would be a really nice day to day walk around system. Used as a day to day walk around system I think it reasonable that few people would or are now carring around tripods and longer lenses. I think we usethe longer lenses for special applications like sports and birding.

I am beginning to think I have an answer to my own original question, due impart to what you thought about the lens problem.

My concept of a FF and also add to the mix a crop sensored version would be that people would want small lenses. This could possible put practical limitation on the FL limit. Just as it did with the Canon rangefinder cameras. Generally 135mm was just about the largest lens people used. Leica did make 400mm and 500mm lenses for use on rangefiner cameras for the 1939 Olympics.

As I have now come to understand things. Canon would do well to keep the DSLR system for the longer lenses. I myself as I already wrote in a prior post have an EOS Mount 800mm f/5.6 and also a 500mm f/4.5. These lenses balance well with a larger DSLR Pro body like my 1DsMkII. The cavieat is that a strong tripod is required when using these FL lenses anyway, so possibly the small form factor of a Canon Mirrorless camera would still be acceptable with a tripod as well and hence Canon could continue providing longer FL lenses in the new format.

For wide angle lenses parralax used to be a problem with mirrorless cameras, but I see that the EVF and rear live view lcd would eleminate that.

As far as the MP count. well I'm fine with 12mp. My 16mp 1DsMkII is very good but I do not usually use the highest mp count (with any camera). Actuall for most of my shooting I use 8mp or less. Only when I have a reason to expect the best IQ do I use the full mp count of any of my cameras.

I see my Canon G10 at 14mp with a semi fast 2.8 28-140mm zoom with an optical viewfinder as an answer for your last suggestion. Canon has since gone on to the G11 and G12. Personaly I find these cameras boring. I only use them when I'm really hesitant to carry a camera. I use my Olympus E-P1 more than my G10 because I like ILC cameras and I have a large selection of small Leica lenses from 28mm to 135mm. My E-P1 is pocketable with one of several small lenses mounted. Using the E-P1 just tells me that I want a Canon version because I think they will make it much better as already described in my OP.
-Peter

MoreorLess said:

As you say it becomes even more of a problem when you factor in multiple lenses.

The main thing agenst it is I'd say that FF might not mean alot to many ammature buyers, just look at how well the 7D has sold. I suspect its more likely Canon will go after the crop market instead which does seem to have a few gaps...

1.A changeble lens system with slr functionality that really pushes megapixels, 18-20 would put Canon well ahead of Sony and Panasonic and would I'd guess tempt alot of potential/current SLR buyers.

2.A fixed lens camera similar to the X1 or X100 with a zoom. This actually seems like the biggest gap in the market to me, the two releases we have are both targetting the fairly small retro street shooter camera market. If Canon put out an 18 megapixel release with a recent general purpose lens I think it would sell very well.

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Yes pointing it out once is considers not badgeing. This is your fourth time. So far besides that you have contributed nothing to conversations in this thread.

BTW, How can a new Canon camera system be an EOS system? It can not. But the conversations must take place somewhere and the Canon FF forum is where I have chosen to bring it up. There is such as thing as progress brought about by new technology and just because Canon does not yet have a mirrorless ILC system nor a Forum for that system does not preclude that someday they will not. I'm sorry that you are so very unhappy with this. All I ask of you now, and for the final time before is to let it go. You are welcome to write your opinions here as to address my question but not welcomed anymore to make a 5th reply concerning my choice of which Canon Form to ask my question in.

FYI about 6 years back here in this very same Canon Forum I asked Phill Askey several times to create a Leica Talk Forum. At first he wrote back and said no. Soon after he did create the Leica Talk Forum. Do you understand this proccess? If I follwed your reasoning I would never been able to ask for a Leica Talk Forum because at the time there was no Leica Talk Forum. Sometimes to get things started one must select the most appropriate place to begin, even if that place is was not originally intended for that purpose. Open your eyes man. Open your mind, give people a chance to ask questions that they think are important. A Canon p&s talk forum is not ad good a place for my question as a Canon FF ILC talk forum. Hence I am posting in this forum. I think I have been very patient with you and the 4 posts telling me this is the wrong forum. That's your opinon not mine.
-Peter ;-)

Vibrio said:

pointing out you are posting in the wrong forum is not badgering

Peter Nelson said:

You have had your say and I have disagreed with you. Leave it alone. It's not up to you to repeatedly badger an other forum member regarding in what forum I chose to post. Remember you are a member here and not a Forum Moderator. So even if you have the opinion that I am posting in the wrong forum you are allowed to state that but there are rules for repeated badgering and you are breaking that rule at this point. Take a look around this thread, out of all the responders you are the only froum member with your point of view.

Allow the people in the FF IDs, ID and 5D/5DII foum an opportunity to read my OP and if they wish to respond with thier opinion regarding a possible Canon mirrorless ILC System. Stop trying to force me to talk with people in the regular Canon Talk Forum who as far as I can see have little interest in a FF camera or an interchangeable lens camera system.

Vibrio said:

it is for canon talk which is what you are posting about since there is no such thing as a FF ILC system.
your post is not relavent in this forum.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

I was actually talking about the problemn of carrying a number of FF DSLR lenses,without even having anything that speicalised I'd probabley want a 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 to cover everything I'd want for shooting landscapes and thats almost 3kg.

I was thinking something more highend than than G of LX releases, a true ASPC sized sesnor with a high quality zoom and good build quality at around $1000. I do think theres a sizeble number of people who want that quality but don't want to be bothered with interchangeble lenses. It does have the advanatge that Canon wouldnt need to commit to it long term aswell.

I'm not saying I wouldnt be interested in a mirrorless FF system but in terms of profit I just get the feeling Canon are going to go for the more compact ammature market.

That's the thing, Canon can go with the Pro, Prosumer and beginingg/ammature market. Why? Because they are already in these markets very strong. Unlike Olympus and Panasonic or Samsung and Sony.

I have the 1DsMkII, and the lenses you like the 17-40 f/4 L, 24-105 f/4 IS L and sold the 70-200 f/4 L.

I like the 17-40L because it's almost like a prime since it's not all that big and heavy and it has a limited FL range. BTW it has markings on the lens barrel for 17mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm & 40mm (all my favorite primes). This lens lives on my 1DsMkII.

Since I no longer earn a dime as a photographer because I'm disabled, I'd rather have the FF 16-24mp Canon Mirrorless ILC and a few very small primes.

Canon's Pro DSLR and "L" System is GREAT if your a working Pro. But since I am now a keen advanced hobbiest I want the pocket system now with the same IQ.

I have learned from our exchange's here and I have since started another thread entitled something like "Canon can have the DSLR and Mirrorless ILC systems side by side. So far no replies.
-Peter

MoreorLess said:

I was actually talking about the problemn of carrying a number of FF DSLR lenses,without even having anything that speicalised I'd probabley want a 17-40, 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 to cover everything I'd want for shooting landscapes and thats almost 3kg.

I was thinking something more highend than than G of LX releases, a true ASPC sized sesnor with a high quality zoom and good build quality at around $1000. I do think theres a sizeble number of people who want that quality but don't want to be bothered with interchangeble lenses. It does have the advanatge that Canon wouldnt need to commit to it long term aswell.

I'm not saying I wouldnt be interested in a mirrorless FF system but in terms of profit I just get the feeling Canon are going to go for the more compact ammature market.

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

As I said, developing a camera is just a small step...successfully marketing, selling and supporting it is another ballgame...

There is a reason why Canon never demonstrated any urge to enter a serious "mirrorless" film camera market (not talking here about P&S but the Leicas of this world) even though Canon started out as a "mirrorless camera company" And, even though digital has significantly changed the game, I believe that they will stay away from the mirrorless market: there's gold in them DSLRs, you know...

Yeah don't get me wrong Peter a more compact mirrorless FF Canon 24MP system with Leica sized lenses would be more likely to get me to spend serious money than the current SLR FF's on offer, I'm just not sure how likely it is.

Bar the M9 convenience of use doesnt seem to be as much of a selling point in the pro/prosumer market as it is in the amature. I spose you could potentially have a system that went after both with both FF and cheaper crop bodies, espeically if the focus was more on primes.

It is actually really simple and easy for Canon to keep their existing EOS DSLR System along side any new system and also in the very near future to introduce a multiple level Canon ILC Mirrorless systems for FF in Pro and Prosumer versions, Crop Sensored In Pro sumer and enthusiasts versions and then even a smaller sensored version for use by everone.

The only difficulty is that that senereo would require possibly 3 different new lens mounts, Or, for FF and 1.6 crop cameras they may be able to use the same lens mount. But Why? The idea of an even smaller sensored camera (less then FF and 1.6 crop) may be a good idea as the system could be smaller still.

From actual ownership experience of the Leica Barnack Screw Mount Cameras Sytems that are true 35mm format I own this gear and it is truly pocketable with certain lenses mounted onto the camera body. So my point is Canon could make a FF pocket ILC mirrorless camera sysetem with the digital sensor the exact same size as the 35mm film format image area. They could also make the small FF lenses as well. This would be a very high IQ FF pocket system.
Yes they could do the same for different sized sensores.
All the while keeping the existing EOS DSLR System in production.
-Peter

MoreorLess said:

Yeah don't get me wrong Peter a more compact mirrorless FF Canon 24MP system with Leica sized lenses would be more likely to get me to spend serious money than the current SLR FF's on offer, I'm just not sure how likely it is.

Bar the M9 convenience of use doesnt seem to be as much of a selling point in the pro/prosumer market as it is in the amature. I spose you could potentially have a system that went after both with both FF and cheaper crop bodies, espeically if the focus was more on primes.

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Canon started out in full frame 35mm mirrororless cameras my friend. The were called screw mount rangefinder's. Canon had them in production from around the 1920's through the late 1960's and that is about 45 years. At the time this was the ONLY camera system mfr'd by Canon.

The SLR overtook the rangefinder sytem because they had no w/a lens parrallax issues and SLR's could use SuperTele lenses with greater agaility and speed.

That SLR System was superseeded by the EOS SLR System which has now been superseeded by the EOS DSLR System.
Canon can mainting the EOS DSLR System along side the new Miirotles ILC System.

You may or may have noticed that the Mirrorless ILC Systems are doing very well and their market is expanding. Canon will not ignore this market forever.

I do not really understand why grown up adults ignore Camera developement history and remain steadfast in the belief that whatever current system is doing well will forever remain the best and current system. That's not following technolglogical development for new product designs and it's ignoring the past history of their favorite camera maker.
-Peter

Badbatz said:

As I said, developing a camera is just a small step...successfully marketing, selling and supporting it is another ballgame...

There is a reason why Canon never demonstrated any urge to enter a serious "mirrorless" film camera market (not talking here about P&S but the Leicas of this world) even though Canon started out as a "mirrorless camera company" And, even though digital has significantly changed the game, I believe that they will stay away from the mirrorless market: there's gold in them DSLRs, you know...

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

Peter Nelson said:

Canon started out in full frame 35mm mirrororless cameras my friend.

Click to expand...

First of all, I am NOT your friend so zip it...

Secondly, that's exactly what I wrote (the even though Canon started out as a "mirrorless camera company" bit.) You are attuned only to your own words, so any conversation with you is a collossal waste of time. Bye!

A second system with its own FF and crop options does I agree sound much more likely than an FF only system.

My point was that if this new system has as you were seeming to suggest a Leica like focus on primes then that potentially makes Canon's job alot easier. No need to make two sets of zooms for both sensor sizes as crop users can just buy a wider prime to achieve the same purpose.

Why less when you can have more ?

FF sensor in form factor roughly equivalent to a G12 ...

Think it is impossible ? Then have a look at this one :

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/data/1956-1965/1959_p.html?lang=us&categ=crn&page=1956-1965

And what a viewfinder ! 1/1 with a 35, 50 and 100mm frames, not the small dark contraptions we have in Dslr now.

Please, don't tell me that Canon cannot do now what they could do 52 years ago !

--
Tessarboy
'photography is about the quality of light'

Tessarboy said:

Why less when you can have more ?

Click to expand...

Price and potentially size, if were talking similar prices to current DSLR's then a $2500 FF rangefinder is probabley going to have a limated audience. If this new system also had a crop version under $1000 though draw more interest and so increase lens sales.

Right you are we are not friends. But still it's only a simlpe and harmless expression. I think your zip it response comment was a little over the top, and I certainly did not need to be talked to in such a rude mannor. Sorry I did not know I was writing to an overly sensative individual.

What exactly do you do to the person who calls you "Pal" in an informal conversation?

BTW when you wrote that Canon was never serious about mirrorless/35mm film rangefinders you implied they were not really in that market.

Since that is precisely where Canon began as a camera company and continued with that system through the 1960's I am of the opinion that you mistated the truth.
-Peter ;-)

Badbatz said:

Peter Nelson said:

Canon started out in full frame 35mm mirrororless cameras my friend.

Click to expand...

First of all, I am NOT your friend so zip it...

Secondly, that's exactly what I wrote (the even though Canon started out as a "mirrorless camera company" bit.) You are attuned only to your own words, so any conversation with you is a collossal waste of time. Bye!

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

You have made a good point regarding wa primes and crop sensored cameras. Yes one unified prime lens system could be used by photographers who use both FF and crop bodies.

You know, at least talking about this here provides a place where we can compare ideas and viewpoints on the matter.

I took my 1DsMkII out last night with the wonderfull 17-40 f/4 L Zoom and my reaction was, wow this gear is gathering dust now that I am only anavid hobbiest.

I have learned that I can select any camera and lens in my cabinets to use on a daily basis. For a few years now I have been chossing smaller and lighter.

I like my Leica M5 but it's 35mm film and honestly I use film only for the recording of special moments. I like my Epson R-D1 but it's a 1.5 crop sensored camera and mywidest Leica lens is only 28mm and it Vinettes on the R-D1. Works very well on the M5. I gues I need to purchase a Leica M9. But my income is lower now that I'm disabled and so I really need Canon to make an affordable digital FF Rangefinder.

If they copied the M9 I would be fine with that. If they provided more electronics so as to appeal to a broader customer base I would be fine with this as well. I'm off course thinking something along the lines of the new Fuji style combo optical/EVF (only better) as well as a nice large rear live view LCD. In any case, I would hope for as many external manual controls as possible. I really prefere photography when I can be more involved with setting theimage taking parameters. All my digital cameras except the Epson R-D1 are not really interesting to use. I'm not complaneing about the IQ at all. But I like manual focusing, setting the shutter speed with a dial, rotating an aperture ring on the lens barrel. I find distance markings on the lens barrel to be very helpfull.

I like the optical rangefinder, one that I can actually use for focusing, not just an optical viewfinder that is usefull for framing the subject only. That's why I wrote in the above paragraph that Canon should do it better than the Fuji X100. I also like live view EVF very much as in my Panasonic G1 and Fuji X100.

MoreorLess said:

A second system with its own FF and crop options does I agree sound much more likely than an FF only system.

My point was that if this new system has as you were seeming to suggest a Leica like focus on primes then that potentially makes Canon's job alot easier. No need to make two sets of zooms for both sensor sizes as crop users can just buy a wider prime to achieve the same purpose.

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

More people need to see these well made FF 35mm film cameras that Canon used to make. Then these people can see what Canon has already done and come to the realization that Canon knows how to make a very good and affordable Mirrorless ILC Camera. Now it's time to make these same cameras in digital.

The form factor shown in your link is a FF 35mm body and it's small pocketable size is what almost everyone is asking for these day's.

So thanks greatly for the link. I wish I had thought to provide it. I did mention the Canon History and asked members who are participating in the thread to go over to the Canon Hall of History to learn more about Canon cameras and the possibilities in the near future for our digital cameras.

I have two Russian made copies of the Leica a FED Ig and and a Zorki Ic screw mount cameras and I know from experience with these cameras that this is the form factor and size for me.

They are close to a Canon G10/11/12 but the are ILC bodies. Of course I want a Canon FF digital sensor inside -Peter ;-)

Tessarboy said:

Why less when you can have more ?

FF sensor in form factor roughly equivalent to a G12 ...

Think it is impossible ? Then have a look at this one :

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/data/1956-1965/1959_p.html?lang=us&categ=crn&page=1956-1965

And what a viewfinder ! 1/1 with a 35, 50 and 100mm frames, not the small dark contraptions we have in Dslr now.

Please, don't tell me that Canon cannot do now what they could do 52 years ago !

--
Tessarboy
'photography is about the quality of light'

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

So I believe the real enthusiasts who have experience and know what they want would love a FF Canon Mirrorless ILC Camera and System.

The not so committed and new users and even p&s upgraders would be happy with a less pricey cropped sensored version because it's still small, pocketable and is ILC with very high IQ as all Current Canon DSLR's already have. The key selling points are affordability, pocketable and ILC and Canon IQ.
Also a new lens line up would be a good long lastinf source of income for Canon.

MoreorLess said:

Tessarboy said:

Why less when you can have more ?

Click to expand...

Price and potentially size, if were talking similar prices to current DSLR's then a $2500 FF rangefinder is probabley going to have a limated audience. If this new system also had a crop version under $1000 though draw more interest and so increase lens sales.

Click to expand...

--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes

...the use of longer [than 100-135mm] FLs - already at 100mm
the frames were encircling only approx 12% of that 1/1 OVF's
area. A possible solution would force either the evil and lags of EVF,
or a dual system a la X100

jpr2

Tessarboy said:

Why less when you can have more ?
FF sensor in form factor roughly equivalent to a G12 ...
Think it is impossible ? Then have a look at this one :

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/data/1956-1965/1959_p.html?lang=us&categ=crn&page=1956-1965

And what a viewfinder ! 1/1 with a 35, 50 and 100mm frames, not the small dark contraptions we have in Dslr now.

Please, don't tell me that Canon cannot do now what they could do 52 years ago !

Click to expand...

--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/

Comments and critique are always welcome!
~