Canon EVIL or just FUD?

[Jeff Tokayer]

If they haven't yet, Canon has to make a decision on the sensor size, to tackle the crossroad they're at. If Nikon goes the 2.5x way, then we could see Canon use a smaller than APS-C sensor. If they choose 2x sensor, it would put Olympus in the best light (I told you so). But they also would have to appease their followers, so my bet is on them continuing with APS-C.

Jeff.

 

[Ehrik]

I'm not sure if that's what you are saying but if they reduce the register to 30mm, both EF and EF-S lenses would mount via the same 14mm adapter.

The new mount could have a smaller diameter, allowing lenses dedicated for it to have reduced diameter, but lens diameter is not an important measure (helps a bit in the bag, but not much more). The distance from the sensor to the front element is the important one and it would not be easier to make that shorter than what is now possible with EF-S. You just move 14mm from the body to the lens (remember a lens can protrude into the mirror chamber so the register is not a hard limit for lens design (only for adaptability); the hard limit is the back focus (mirror clearance) and that's still the same.

So, points for creative thinking, but I'm not sure I see the point.

The decision is puzzling and strange at the same time, but I do believe there is room to cut the width of the camera making it purely a 1.6x crop dslr.

I could be wrong, but I believe that the current

• 44mm flange distance allow Canon Rebel to mountan fullframe lens without adapter
• Take out any fullframe lens compatibility ( but allow mounting via adapter ), canon should be able to cut the width down quite a bit going from 1.0x to 1.6x.
• My guess is that 1.6x crop (while retaining its already tiny viewfinder of 0.87x), can managed a flange distance of 30mm or so

--
Just my two öre,
Erik from Sweden

 

[boyzo]

--
John

http://boyzo.smugmug.com
http://picasaweb.google.com/john.boyzo

 

[Jeff Tokayer]

If the change the format from 2/3 to 4/3, then they only need to change the mount to FT and call it and Olympus ;-)

Jeff.

 

[peter42y]

A window does one thing that can never be replicated electronically. Similarly, throw all the gimmicks onto an EVF that you want, it will never show you what the world really looks like like an OVF.....

I don't want to see what the world really looks like. I want to see how my image capture device is going to see it.

--
Björn

http://www.bmupix.com

Exactly.
I never owned a DSLR just a ricoh compact.
The other day I looked through a Can OVF and I was shocked.
The Ricoh R8 LCD is so much better.

Image is larger...,since I use glasses its more confortable to look at an LCD than to look at a OVF.., I can adjust brightness and can see immediately in the LCD screen the result..,I can see wich better white balance does look better...;
LCD is so much better..;

It does turn out people got used to OVF..,and they want it...,but for someone shortsighted that does use glasses.., the LCD is much better than OVF

 

[Melbourne Park]

It doesnt sound like it. Its like saying a television will replace a window.

lol, a window that does only one thing, and gets blocked when in use.

A window does one thing that can never be replicated electronically. Similarly, throw all the gimmicks onto an EVF that you want, it will never show you what the world really looks like like an OVF.. some people appreciate that more than seeing a pixelated image of the world at 14x zoom.

vs. a sharp HDTV that does about 20 useful things.

Actually the reason why people pay $7k for a Leica M9 body only, is that it does use the window principle. The M9 focus's without having its light being interfered with by layers and layers of telescopic or wide angles glass.

The DSLR is far from a window: its a telecope or a magnifying glass, and both those instruments typically ruin the view.

The EVF sees things just like your sensor sees things ... it has the capacity (in time it will get better and better) to make up for dull glass that a DSLR uses to ruin the view out of the window. The EVF has a lot more potential than a DSLR's viewfinder. One only has to look at how many consumers want to live view attached to their DSLRs. In time, the EVF will take over. But when it has, the Leica m13 will still be providing a real window to the world!

 

[fmian]

Add it all up. Canon is making a tiny 1.6x EF-S DSLR with mirror intact. Nowhere in the article did the guy say canon is letting for of the mirror or the optical viewfinder.

Yeah I would totally buy one of those!

Canon already has a clear lead on the new micro system cameras with it's efs range of lenses, some of them being considered in the same class as the L series.

If they add a small efs camera to their range, OVF or not, it should shoehorn the EVF/Mirrorless competition away.

 

[viztyger]

Exactly.
I never owned a DSLR just a ricoh compact.
The other day I looked through a Can OVF and I was shocked.
The Ricoh R8 LCD is so much better.

Image is larger...,since I use glasses its more confortable to look at an LCD than to look at a OVF.., I can adjust brightness and can see immediately in the LCD screen the result..,I can see wich better white balance does look better...;
LCD is so much better..;

It does turn out people got used to OVF..,and they want it...,but for someone shortsighted that does use glasses.., the LCD is much better than OVF

I also wear glasses. I've used DSLRs from Sony (A100), Nikon (D300), and Pentax (K-7) before switching to Micro Four Thirds. The eyepoint on all these cameras was marginal for someone wearing glasses, meaning that I couldn't see all of the frame at once. On top of that, the rubber eyepiece was too close to the back of the cameras. So if I tried to see more/all of the frame by pressing my eye into the finder, then my face would leave an oily film on the nice, glossy screen.

Surprisingly, for a company without decades of experience with optical viewfinders, Panasonic's viewfinder on the G1/GH1 worked much better for me. The eye cup is much further from the rear of the camera so I didn't have to press my face into the camera. And if it's still a problem, you can turn the screen around to face the back of the camera so you won't get any smudges on it. The EVF has a comfortable, large, rectangular, soft rubber eye piece which works well with glasses. If you still can't see all of the frame easily, Panasonic even includes a viewfinder layout that adds a black frame around the edges of the live view. That way the image is smaller and it's easier to see the whole frame at once. Well done.

--
Björn

http://www.bmupix.com

 

[papillon_65]

Add it all up. Canon is making a tiny 1.6x EF-S DSLR with mirror intact. Nowhere in the article did the guy say canon is letting for of the mirror or the optical viewfinder.

Yeah I would totally buy one of those!

Canon already has a clear lead on the new micro system cameras with it's efs range of lenses, some of them being considered in the same class as the L series.

If they add a small efs camera to their range, OVF or not, it should shoehorn the EVF/Mirrorless competition away.

Yea right, have you any idea how small the ovf would have to be to make tiny dslr? Olympus has already been down this road with the E-400/410/420 and their glass is already excellent. There is only so far you can go with a dslr in terms of size and useability. Nothing new to see here lol.
--
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 

[antoineb]

...unlike many others, Canon have a history of being quite good at keeping their mouths shut and preventing leaks, thus being able to surprise everyone when the time comes.

as recently as a few weeks ago, most self-appointed "experts" estimated that, given that there had been no rumours on the topic, Canon would clearly be very late to the party, if they came at all.

now maybe they'll be discovering that Canon were not standing still. ;-)

 

[SDF]

m4/3 killer?

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/canon-evil-on-the-way-cr3/
--

I refuse to wed myself to any of these vendors. I'm just having fun taking pictures,
and watching the technology develop.

 

[Ehrik]

m4/3 killer?

Seems by the way they talk about it, it will have the mirror left, which ought to mean they lose the advantage of making wide lenses simpler, better and smaller. In which case it won't compete in compactness with µ43.
--
Just my two öre,
Erik from Sweden

 

[Marty4650]

Being "first" isn't always a big advantage.

The brands that come after you can copy your technology and learn from your mistakes.

For example.....

Toyota wasn't the first company to build a car.
Toyota was founded in 1937, roughly 40 years after others were doing it first.

Apple made their first cell phone in 2007
24 years after Motorola introduced the DynaTAC phone in 1983.

Nikon was NOT a pioneer in making film cameras.
Nikon was formed in 1917, which is 29 years after Kodak was selling cameras.

So in the grand scheme of things, it really matters little if a company's first MILC camera was introduced in 2008, 2010, or 2012. What will matter is if that company can deliver the performance, features, and image quality that the market wants.

It would be a mistake to assume Panasonic and Olympus have a huge advantage of Canon and Nikon because they will be a few years late to the party.

--
Marty
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
Olympus E-30
Olympus E-P1

 

[Aleo Veuliah]

I doubt they can make it smaller than a Olympus E-450, I think it will be without mirror if they want to be smaller

--
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication

• http://aleo-photo.org

• http://blog.aleo-photo.org