I'm just using rational logic. The lens optical design has already been done, the manufacturing lines and tooling are already done. Now it's just a matter of changing the lens housing to have an RF mount and to shift the lens 2mm into the RF body. All of this is just very practical and even boring. But it is a huge cost saver. You're trying to peddle a romanticized notion of "new manufacturing processes" (oooh, aaaah!) that "won't be very compatible with the M system"?!? Sounds like a lot of marketing nonsense, like at an Apple keynote presentation. You've been drinking too much of the Kool-Ade!
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
EOS R white paper giving clues about EF-M system? + musings
- Thread starter Jonathan Brady
- Start date
I would bet that the crop RF bodies will be coming in 2020 at the latest.
So am I.
This doesn't mean it will fit into whatever process Canon will use going forward with the R system.
Marketing doesn't have to make sense. It rarely does. I don't think Canon will want the R system to be viewed as a recycled M system. IMO, they are looking to make a clean break from the EF-M mount and the best indication of this is they chose not to make it compatible in any way with the RF mount.
I don't see how smartphone technology will not come to dedicated cameras. IMO, it is about the only way they will survive the onslaught of the smartphone segment. Doing more with software and less with hardware is the future of photography.
Sorry, buddy, but yields are still way higher for APS-C sensors compared to FF! Even with 100% perfect yield, the yield on FF sensors is still a fraction of what you can get with APS-C sensors.
Consider that the cheapest FF camera you can buy new is the five year old, barebones Sony A7. And that camera is still $798.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00FRDUZXM/ref=twister_B00PBBE4DC?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1
In comparison, you can buy a Sony APS-C A6000 for only $448:
https://www.amazon.com/Sony-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera-3-0-Inch/dp/B00I8BICCG
The sensor is still the single biggest factor in the cost of a camera. There is no way that even Sony, which is the biggest sensor manufacturer in the world, can sell a FF camera for the price of an A6000.
Yes, a clean break from the mount, but optics are optics, and there's nothing wrong with the optics in EF-M lenses. Plus, you are forgetting the time and COST of developing all new lenses! You act as if designing new lenses is totally cost-free! It would be financially foolish for Canon to start from scratch to arrive at basically the same lenses! LOL. I work in lean manufacturing, and I can tell you that we constantly evaluate manufacturing efficiency. There's no such thing as a "clean break" unless your existing processes or instruments are so broken that they are totally unsalvageable, or no longer needed. Yes, the mount will be changed because it will no longer be needed. That will be the extent of the "clean break". I'm talking about the optical designs. Those will still be needed, and they are just fine as they are, especially for their target price point! You're talking about throwing the baby out with the bath water!
Last edited:
crashpc
Veteran Member
Some companies now use larger wafers for better yields. Not many though.
By your own statements you have said Canon is more than willing to jettison some mounts/camera gear to make way for a new system. They have dumped systems with massively more investment in them than they have into the M system. IMO, a major reason they have invested so little in EF-M lenses is to make the abandonment of the M system a much easier decision economically.
They have done this before and with much more money and corporate identity invested in what they left behind.
My guess is there are many reasons Canon will not use EF-M lens designs verbatim in the RF mount. They range from design, marketing and manufacturing considerations. I do expect them to absorb parts of the knowledge they have learned from building the M system. The R's similarities to the M50 show this is true. I think the purpose of the M system was to develop technology and know how for manufacturing/selling MILC cameras for use in the R system. This is bolstered by the fact we have seen a very disproportionate number of M camera bodies in comparison to EF-M lenses.
What would be the point of not using the EF-M optical formulas? Just a way for Canon to waste their money on totally new optical formulas and retooling their production lines? Nice. They could start from scratch, but it would be foolish. There's only a 2mm difference between the flange distance of RF and EF-M. Other than the lens mount, that's the only difference. If Canon wanted to have an immediate crop RF set of lenses, they could easily do it with existing EF-M optical formulas. But then again, maybe Canon arrogance will have them starting from scratch and making users wait years for crop RF lenses to trickle out
I wouldn't put it past Canon to do that!
Jonathan Brady
Veteran Member
I think it's just because the target market for lower end bodies is generally happy with 1-2 zoom lenses.
Aren't there disproportionately more APSC DSLR than EF-S lenses?
Jonathan Brady
Veteran Member
I tend to agree that, assuming they can use the EF-M optical formulas, that they likely would use at least some of them (assuming they launched an RF-C system). But, I'll add a caveat... this depends on how long they wait to launch an RF-C system. If it's 10 years from now and the EF-M 32/1.4 is the last EF-M lens they launch, I would assume that their optical prowess would have improved to the point that it makes sense to opt for new designs. But, if it's a year or two from now, why not simply swap the mounts on lenses like the 11-22, 32/1.4, maybe the 22/2, 28/3.5 Macro IS, and 18-150.What would be the point of not using the EF-M optical formulas? Just a way for Canon to waste their money on totally new optical formulas and retooling their production lines? Nice. They could start from scratch, but it would be foolish. There's only a 2mm difference between the flange distance of RF and EF-M. Other than the lens mount, that's the only difference. If Canon wanted to have an immediate crop RF set of lenses, they could easily do it with existing EF-M optical formulas. But then again, maybe Canon arrogance will have them starting from scratch and making users wait years for crop RF lenses to trickle out
I think they will use what they have learned from putting out the M system in future R components. We might even see similar lenses but I don't think they will be knock offs of EF-M lenses. From a marketing perspective, I think Canon is looking to up sell the R system and I know some people will not like what I am about to say. The general perception of the M system is that it is lacking in capability. Even many M users hold this view. This is also one of the major reasons I think Canon cut the M system out of any compatibility with the R system. They don't want the perception that it is just a tarted up M system regarding R FF or APS-C offerings. For marketing reasons they want the R system to be a clean break from the past.What would be the point of not using the EF-M optical formulas? Just a way for Canon to waste their money on totally new optical formulas and retooling their production lines? Nice. They could start from scratch, but it would be foolish. There's only a 2mm difference between the flange distance of RF and EF-M. Other than the lens mount, that's the only difference. If Canon wanted to have an immediate crop RF set of lenses, they could easily do it with existing EF-M optical formulas. But then again, maybe Canon arrogance will have them starting from scratch and making users wait years for crop RF lenses to trickle out
The 800lb gorilla in the room regarding the relationship between the M and R systems is the fact that Canon deliberately chose to make them incompatible. This flies in the face of good long term marketing and manufacturing considerations. Canon's actions are telling, IMO. I might be wrong but my best guess is that the M system is a place holder until the R APS-C gear is ready to supersede it. While the M system may not have started as a place holder, I think Canon may have decided to make it so 1-2 years into its existence. There is a reason that the world's most prolific and capable lens manufacturer decided to slow roll EF-M lens development. The rollout of the R system is now the best indicator as to why this happened.
No, they aren't going to wait ten years. It'll probably be within 2 years. 10 years is an eternity. The entire Sony FF mirrorless system is not even 5 years old (it was introduced October 2013).I tend to agree that, assuming they can use the EF-M optical formulas, that they likely would use at least some of them (assuming they launched an RF-C system). But, I'll add a caveat... this depends on how long they wait to launch an RF-C system. If it's 10 years from now and the EF-M 32/1.4 is the last EF-M lens they launch, I would assume that their optical prowess would have improved to the point that it makes sense to opt for new designs. But, if it's a year or two from now, why not simply swap the mounts on lenses like the 11-22, 32/1.4, maybe the 22/2, 28/3.5 Macro IS, and 18-150.What would be the point of not using the EF-M optical formulas? Just a way for Canon to waste their money on totally new optical formulas and retooling their production lines? Nice. They could start from scratch, but it would be foolish. There's only a 2mm difference between the flange distance of RF and EF-M. Other than the lens mount, that's the only difference. If Canon wanted to have an immediate crop RF set of lenses, they could easily do it with existing EF-M optical formulas. But then again, maybe Canon arrogance will have them starting from scratch and making users wait years for crop RF lenses to trickle out
But this has nothing to do with the current optical formulas. They are fine as they are. Canon simply needs to add additional lenses to the existing ones. Starting from scratch means time lost and wasted on re-creating existing crop lenses.
This is nonsense. EOS M has many fans. And within the EOS R system, there will eventually be low end and high end bodies, much like Canon currently has with their EOS DSLR system.
I don't think you understand that Canon can certainly move ahead with EOS R while still making use of the optical formulas currently used in EF-M lenses. Most consumers would never even know, or care, that the same optical formulas were being re-used from the EOS M system. And this would especially be the case with lower-end users. They just want cheap, compact, affordable crop lenses for their crop EOS R bodies. That's reality, not the weird romanticism you seem to be stuck on.
Jonathan Brady
Veteran Member
I was giving disparate examples with an implied continuum in between.No, they aren't going to wait ten years. It'll probably be within 2 years. 10 years is an eternity. The entire Sony FF mirrorless system is not even 5 years old (it was introduced October 2013).I tend to agree that, assuming they can use the EF-M optical formulas, that they likely would use at least some of them (assuming they launched an RF-C system). But, I'll add a caveat... this depends on how long they wait to launch an RF-C system. If it's 10 years from now and the EF-M 32/1.4 is the last EF-M lens they launch, I would assume that their optical prowess would have improved to the point that it makes sense to opt for new designs. But, if it's a year or two from now, why not simply swap the mounts on lenses like the 11-22, 32/1.4, maybe the 22/2, 28/3.5 Macro IS, and 18-150.What would be the point of not using the EF-M optical formulas? Just a way for Canon to waste their money on totally new optical formulas and retooling their production lines? Nice. They could start from scratch, but it would be foolish. There's only a 2mm difference between the flange distance of RF and EF-M. Other than the lens mount, that's the only difference. If Canon wanted to have an immediate crop RF set of lenses, they could easily do it with existing EF-M optical formulas. But then again, maybe Canon arrogance will have them starting from scratch and making users wait years for crop RF lenses to trickle out
Also, using Sony as a yardstick for technological advancement in a discussion about Canon is a bit like using modern supercomputers as the benchmark for someone looking at a Chromebook.
I think the R system will follow the EF system as time passes. The APS-C variants will be capable but will not be allowed to seriously infringe on FF lenses. This has been a very successful model for Canon and I see no reason why it can't be used with the R system.
Not as much in the first six years of APS-C DSLR development. I believe there were six models in the first six years of APS-C DSLRs. The rate of lens development for EF-S has been better than EF-M development but with EF-S taking EF lenses natively there was less pressure to develop EF-S lenses. Native lenses for the EF-M mount have been very slow in coming to market by comparison to MFT and Fuji lens development over the same general time frame.
M4Mobility
Senior Member
This is how Canon pictures the future of the R system:
Big and heavy future, it seems.
R = big, heavy, expensive. + lenses for ultimate IQ
M = small, light, relatively cheap. + compact and very good to excellent lenses.
2 independent systems.
M: One premium new lens just released. Two new M bodies coming in 2019. More lenses coming. (I predict two new lenses in 2019.) Future looks good !
(And you know what? I just checked: My M camera and lenses still works. (That can't be right ???))
Big and heavy future, it seems.
R = big, heavy, expensive. + lenses for ultimate IQ
M = small, light, relatively cheap. + compact and very good to excellent lenses.
2 independent systems.
M: One premium new lens just released. Two new M bodies coming in 2019. More lenses coming. (I predict two new lenses in 2019.) Future looks good !
(And you know what? I just checked: My M camera and lenses still works. (That can't be right ???))
Last edited:
Canon FD users in 1986: "One premium FD body, the T90, just released. Future of FD looks good!" :-D
1987, Canon launches the EOS system. 1990, Canon launches one last FD body, the T60. 1992, Canon FD system is finally discontinued.
The rumors state that two Canon APS-C mirrorless cameras are coming in 2019. It says nothing about them being M bodies. One or both could very well be EOS R bodies.
No one ever said that your M cameras and lenses would stop working.More lenses coming. (I predict two new lenses in 2019.) Future looks good !
Last edited:
Most EF-M lenses are slow and not the sharpest compared to competitors. Canon likely has a lens map developed for their internal use tied to camera releases. I doubt we will see recycled EF-M lenses in the RF line. Time will tell which of us is right.
Many fans have been critical of how Canon has slow walked EF-M lens development. The M system is not seen as a technology leader. Especially in recent years as Fuji, Sony, Olympus and Panasonic have been advancing their products very quickly. The M system is the low man on the MILC technology totem pole.
Canon can do whatever they want. I think they are more concerned with marketing regarding the R system than saving a few dollars on a lackluster set of recycled EF-M lenses. I believe the M system will never be part of it in any form because it won't serve any useful purpose and could end up damaging the R brand.
Some won't care but the chattering class will care. These people have a disproportionate impact on camera and lens sales. Canon would be wise to consider their potential reactions, IMO. They ignored this group with the 6D2 and paid a heavy price for doing so.
If you do a little digging, you will find that many of the original EF mount lenses reused FD optical designs.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum