Will Canon's FF Mirrorless be EF or EF-M Mount?

Hi all,

A couple of months ago I asked what mount you wanted for Canon's upcoming professional full frame mirrorless camera. The majority voted for EF although it was close. What I want now want to know is what you now think it will be, not what you want it to be.

So, what mount do you THINK it will be?

According to Tony Northrup, both Canon and Nikon will release their respective entry-level FF mirrorless next year with respective new mirrorless mount (EF-M from Canon logically) with a 'free' adapter included.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za2AeCujDZk

No clue but I'm guessing it will have an out of date sensor.

mfenske wrote:

No clue but I'm guessing it will have an out of date sensor.

Haha, I could see that happening.

What would be the point to have an EF Mirrorless ? Why keep the bulk if the mirror is no longer needed?

I am 100% sure Canon will use the same EF-M mount for their future FF Mirrorless. It fits there.

Sony started their mirrorless products with APS-C and expanded to FF using the same mount. Even today all Sony mirrorless cameras can use the legacy Minolta mount with adapter and of course the newer mirrorless  E lenses remain 100% compatible with both APS-C and FF.

With the EF-M mount you have more advantages and flexibility than with the EF mount.

pawn wrote:

The Fat Fish wrote:

Hi all,

A couple of months ago I asked what mount you wanted for Canon's upcoming professional full frame mirrorless camera. The majority voted for EF although it was close. What I want now want to know is what you now think it will be, not what you want it to be.

So, what mount do you THINK it will be?

From a non-technical perspective, it has to be EF so that people can leverage a large collection of EF lenses that they already have.

With EF-M You can get an adapter and leave it there fixed forever. If it is EF only, only EF would be compatible and won't be portable FF bodies for that market segment.

Question: if EF-M mount is used and that EF-M --> EF adapter is used, what are the down sides of using EF lenses on EF-M mount FF mirrorless besides the added size of the adapter?

Absolutely no down side with EF adapter.

My shot is that Canon has held back and will release the FF mirrorless with a new generation of glass that as M users we've been hoping for.  FWIW, my luck winning the lottery is about as good as my predicting what Canon is going to do.

The Fat Fish wrote:

Hi all,

A couple of months ago I asked what mount you wanted for Canon's upcoming professional full frame mirrorless camera. The majority voted for EF although it was close. What I want now want to know is what you now think it will be, not what you want it to be.

So, what mount do you THINK it will be?

It will have to be EF-M. Because if it will remain EF/EF-s:

- It will not get the best in performance of MILCs

- Up to a point, and especially with APS-C, there is indeed a size and weight advantage

- Many of existing EF lenses also need to a retrofit anyway. To be able to do video effectively, the new nano USM AF needs to be put in the new EF-M lenses. It combines the best of old style USM and STM. The new nano seems faster and quieter too. It hits the spot for fast AF and quiet AFing both in video and photo.

- With the exceptional performances of the Sony, Fuji lenses, particularly Sony, there really is a need to re-do many Canon lenses. The 24-105 f4L, the 12-24, and 16-35 are just a few that needs a retrofit. Removing that space in old lenses will help improve optical performance in some focal lengths which were very hard to get right in the past.

- To not go true mirrorless lenses is to be saddled with the baggage of the past. There really is a lot that can be done in terms of size, weight reduction, AF performance (good for video as well), and making lenses fast, with good corner-to-corner sharpness.

However, the use of adapters will be there as a transition to EF-M. That is a given. Canon, even with its deep pockets can't simply build to replace all existing lenses it has. It will take them 10 years or so to get maybe 12-18 lenses out. Meanwhile, they will have to do with existing lenses. Canon will experience the same criticisms of the lack of lenses their fans hurled at Sony, the MFT and Fuji when they were revamping their lens lineup.

As a new owner of an M6 kit + 22mm f2.0, I see this lack of EF-M lenses and this is not new to me, being an owner of other brand MILCs. But having an adapter helps in the transition. So, I can live with the size and weight of a 50mm f1.8 STM mounted on my M6, while a native sony 50 f1.8 OSS beats it in size, weight and it has IS as well. It also comes with a lens hood and I don't have to worry scouting for a cheaper 3rd party lens hood to complete it.

pawn wrote:

caterpillar wrote:

The Fat Fish wrote:

Hi all,

A couple of months ago I asked what mount you wanted for Canon's upcoming professional full frame mirrorless camera. The majority voted for EF although it was close. What I want now want to know is what you now think it will be, not what you want it to be.

So, what mount do you THINK it will be?

It will have to be EF-M. Because if it will remain EF/EF-s:

- It will not get the best in performance of MILCs

Can you please elaborate this point?

Every single one of the EF-M lenses is sharper than the EF-S and EF equivalent with rare exceptions.
I think this is due to less "diffraction" given the shorter flange back distance that mirrorless allows, 18mm vs 44mm for EF/EF-S

caterpillar wrote:

The Fat Fish wrote:

Hi all,

A couple of months ago I asked what mount you wanted for Canon's upcoming professional full frame mirrorless camera. The majority voted for EF although it was close. What I want now want to know is what you now think it will be, not what you want it to be.

So, what mount do you THINK it will be?

It will have to be EF-M. Because if it will remain EF/EF-s:

- It will not get the best in performance of MILCs

- Up to a point, and especially with APS-C, there is indeed a size and weight advantage

- Many of existing EF lenses also need to a retrofit anyway. To be able to do video effectively, the new nano USM AF needs to be put in the new EF-M lenses. It combines the best of old style USM and STM. The new nano seems faster and quieter too. It hits the spot for fast AF and quiet AFing both in video and photo.

- With the exceptional performances of the Sony, Fuji lenses, particularly Sony, there really is a need to re-do many Canon lenses. The 24-105 f4L, the 12-24, and 16-35 are just a few that needs a retrofit. Removing that space in old lenses will help improve optical performance in some focal lengths which were very hard to get right in the past.

- To not go true mirrorless lenses is to be saddled with the baggage of the past. There really is a lot that can be done in terms of size, weight reduction, AF performance (good for video as well), and making lenses fast, with good corner-to-corner sharpness.

However, the use of adapters will be there as a transition to EF-M. That is a given. Canon, even with its deep pockets can't simply build to replace all existing lenses it has. It will take them 10 years or so to get maybe 12-18 lenses out. Meanwhile, they will have to do with existing lenses. Canon will experience the same criticisms of the lack of lenses their fans hurled at Sony, the MFT and Fuji when they were revamping their lens lineup.

As a new owner of an M6 kit + 22mm f2.0, I see this lack of EF-M lenses and this is not new to me, being an owner of other brand MILCs. But having an adapter helps in the transition. So, I can live with the size and weight of a 50mm f1.8 STM mounted on my M6, while a native sony 50 f1.8 OSS beats it in size, weight and it has IS as well. It also comes with a lens hood and I don't have to worry scouting for a cheaper 3rd party lens hood to complete it.

the only reason the sony lens is smaller and lighter is because its a APS-c lens .....the shorter flange distance is no help on a 50mm lens ...that's why the sony has a built in spacer and why its as long as the canon 50stm + adaptor .....but the sony is a good sharp relatively compact  affordable APS-c lens ..its the only one sony has  with ALL those 3 traits

-- hide signature --

- Caterpillar
'Always in the process of changing, growing, and transforming.'

nnowak wrote:

First and foremost is the problem of perception if Canon were to go full frame EF-M mount. Full frame EF-M instantly signals to every working pro that their entire EF lens inventory is now obsolete and will soon drop in value. Think that might anger a few people? If the long term prospect is that you will eventually replace every lens you own with a virtually identical EF-M version, what is to stop you from just starting over with Nikon or Sony?

There is more friction to change to a different system than just the perception that your glass will eventually depreciate in value. You could also argue that in the Sony system you have the option of more portable FF bodies with small primes.

Next up are the technical merits of the two mounts. With the mirror gone, there are no optical designs that you could build for the EF-M mount that could not be duplicated in the EF mount. In fact, the EF mount makes bright lenses easier due to the much larger throat diameter.

Almost every single EF-M lens is sharper than its EF equivalent due to the shorter flange back distance. This is not a theory, you can clearly see this in the resolution charts, EF-S vs EF-M.

But what about mount adapters? They suck. If you are carrying multiple lenses with mixed mounts, the only option that makes sense is to put an adapter on every lense in your bag. Your camera body might be thinner with an EF-M mount, but now a buch of your lenses just got bigger. There are also several problems with the design of the current EF-M adapter; the internal baffle blocks a full frame image, it is not weather sealed, and it is not sturdy enough to support larger bodies and lenses. There is also no physical blocking mechanism that would prevent use of the current adpater instead of a newer "full frame" adapter and there is no identification on the current adapter indicating that it is only for crop cameras. That is a recipe for problems.

The adapter thing is a temporary transitional compromise.
Business wise it makes more sense for Canon to have customers buy the newer EF-M lenses to enjoy its benefits yet nobody is forcing users to do it.

People need to stop thinking in terms of a full frame M2 + 22mm and start thinking in terms of a mirrorless 1DX + 600mm f4.

You could think about Sony A + 35mm lens vs Canon 5D + 35mm