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

justmeMN wrote:

Marty4650 wrote: Why wouldn't Canon want to sell their users brand new FF MILC lenses, rather than just letting them use FF DSLR lenses they already own?

Why would owners of Canon FF DSLRs want the expense of buying a whole new set of lenses?

If a Canon FF DSLR user wanted a FF MILC camera, then they currently have only two options. Sony FE and Leica SL. And perhaps soon a Nikon FF MILC system. I assume that some of them would prefer a Canon FF MILC system out of sheer brand loyalty. Plus, it is pretty certain that even with a new mount they could use EF lenses with an adapter and still get full automation.

Canon still has an advantage with their already installed base. Even if they create a brand new lens mount to take full advantage of mirrorless.

And it would give Sony an opportunity to say "as long as you need to buy new lenses, you should switch to us, because we have more native lenses".

Yes, but only if you need to buy new lenses. If you already own EF lenses then an adapter would be a much cheaper solution, since you are talking about cost now.

PWPhotography wrote:

davev8 wrote:

RubberDials wrote:

PWPhotography wrote:

One lens I keep using as an example to have great benefits on e-mount is my favorite 17L/4.0 TS-E. No exaggeration if anyone actually try Canon TS-E lenses on e-mount, you'd agree it's just so much easier and lots more effective than on Canon EF-mount itself.

I shoot TS-E lenses (used to own 24L TS-E II also) as a P&S lens most times hand-held. My eye stays in EVF all the time even under bright sunlight. With Canon DSLRs, you'd have to use back LCD for precise MF that is unpractical in bright sunlight.

Then right in EVF, either with magnification toggle (1x/5x/10x with A7r II or 1x/7x/14x with A7r) or with focus peaking (very accurate so I use mostly these days), I can get precise MF in seconds. Well, on Canon DSLRs, you'd have to push button a few times to get into magnification.

If you use Tilt function, it's just so easy and effective with focus-peaking to get the best balance in end to end sharpness in seconds to achieve indefinite DOF (that something regular lenses just cannot even stop down to F22 which only deteriorates IQ). Well, on Canon DSLRs, it's a trial-and-error tedious practice. You'd better to use a third-party monitor plug-in hotshoe to get similar sort of focus peaking. Basically you'd have to shoot on tripod with Canon DSLRs (unpractical under bright sunlight) while I shoot mostly hand-held on A7-series.

Here is a sample that I am challenging Canon and Nikon DSLR owners with respective 17L TS-E or 19G PC-E lenses. I can easily to get pixel-level sharp photos at 1/6 sec (A7r III IBIS is even better) and can push to 1/4 sec. Try on 5DsR and D850 and let's compare hand-held as tripod is absolutely not allowed inside unless you have special privilege.

Very good points and the reason that ultimately all professional use will migrate to mirrorless systems.

it would be the reason if all pro only take photos of building that don't move

Mirrorless also can handle moving subjects such as on a moving eye or fast moving subjects in sports and wildlife as the latest models from mirrorless camp. This is only beginning, the beginning of the end of DSLR era in 10 years probably. Really nothing a DSLR can do, a mirrorless cannot do these days but only do more in some areas.

a was not referring to AF but IBIS wich was the main point being made with the above shot

nice photo

Great photo PW!

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com

-- hide signature --

My 5D IS a MK1 classic
..........................................................................................................
There is no argument for FF vs APS-c (or m43) with shallow DOF..as it's a law of physics and a very subjective personal thing if you want to make use of the shallow DOF only FF can offer
...........................................................................................................
Political correctness....somebody being offended on someone else's behalf....who that someone doesn't give a damn in the first place ....David Appleton
..................................................................................................
quoting irrefutable facts may get you branded a racist ..even if no race is involved .......David Appleton

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Dlee13 wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

I think it will be an EF mount. Canon has shown little interest in developing the EF-M mount in any serious way and they have a massive investment in the EF catalog. If anything I think they will offer a variation of the EF-M mount that will be like the EF mount is to the EF-S mount. Also, if they offer a serious FF MILC that is targeted at professionals then having an EF mount is critical to its success, IMO. Otherwise, they would have to launch 5-10 new, high quality lenses along with the body and I don't think Canon will take a risk like this.

Lastly, we have seen that when it comes to professional, bright lenses the size/weight advantage of any MILC vanishes which further pushes the mount toward EF. I think it would be smart if Canon allowed the FF MILC to use EF-S lenses in a crop mode for the sensor. This would let a user take advantage of the small, lightweight, STM EF-S lenses they are offering. Basically, it would give the new FF MILC the ability to go small and lightweight if the user wanted to.

You actually made me wonder about this. I have the M3/M5 and they both work flawlessly with the adapter Canon provides so even if it was an EF-M Mount body, I know the adaptor wouldn't have an issue.

Now onto my crazy theory. With the current mounts, it's undeniable that EF gets more love than EF-S lenses. Now considering we have hardly had any new EF-M lenses and minimal EF-S lenses, what if this is because Canon shifted their focus onto FF EF-M lenses to launch alongside the new body? The body would have no issues using the EF-M adapter so we could have some lenses made just for the new mirrorless body as well as all our existing lenses.

It is just a wild theory but could be feasible too.

I think about anything is open for speculation right now. If you are right then it still doesn't explain why they virtually ignored the EF-M mount for its first four years. Maybe they are turning the EF-M mount into the mirrorless version of the EF-S mount.

There is no version of a EF-S mount you will only find two mounts listed in Canon literature EF and EF-M the EF-S mount is a internet creation.

That is the will both be slaves to the EF mount. Just like when a person moves to FF from ASP-C DSLRs they forgo use of their EF-S lenses

EF-S lenses are specialty lenses designed to take advantage of the smaller mirror of a APS-C camera that is the reason you can not use them on a full frame camera when mounted they touch the mirror.

the EOS M APS-C user might have to do the same with their EF-M lenses. This would explain the lack of EF-M lenses, in general, and higher end ones.

No it will not the M series cameras do not have a mirror so there  is no physical limitation to using a EF-M lens on a full frame M camera.

Marty4650 wrote:

NotAPhotog wrote:

One thing I can absolutely guarantee with 100% confidence: they will introduce a new mount. Why? For profits, plain and simple.

That might be the primary reason, but there are other reasons as well.

A new mount would make their new lenses smaller and lighter than their DSLR full frame lenses are.

no it wont make lenses any smaller ..its already explain why in this thread

New lenses mean they can refresh their 30 year old DSLR lens designs. And they could add more contacts if they felt they might need them, like Olympus did when they went from 9 contact pins on the Four Thirds lens mount to 11 on the M4/3 lens mount. Thereby making their new lenses future ready.

But you are 100% correct when you say profit is the main motive. Why wouldn't Canon want to sell their users brand new FF MILC lenses, rather than just letting them use FF DSLR lenses they already own?

No camera system that used previously owned or other brand lenses was ever successful.

Where are the Samsung DSLRs that used Pentax lenses, or the Fuji DSLRs that used Nikon lenses? Or the Kodak DSLRs that used both Canon and Nikon lenses? Or those Leica DSLR that used Olympus and Panasonic lenses.

And has anyone noticed that most Four Thirds lenses have lost 80% of their value even though you can still use them with an adapter?

I also noticed that Sony chose to use the E mount for their Full Frame FE system, and not the existing Minolta-Alpha mount. I am certain that many Full Frame Sony DSLR users would have preferred the older mount, but Sony made a smart business decision so they could sell a bunch of very expensive new FE mount lenses.--

no the minolta A mount is not fully electronic ...sony's original intention was not to make a FF mount out of the E mount ...both Zeiss and sigma say at one time they would not make FF lenses for the E mount because of the IQ challenges of making FF lenses for such a small mount

Marty
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
my blog: http://marty4650.blogspot.com/

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Dlee13 wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Dlee13 wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

I think it will be an EF mount. Canon has shown little interest in developing the EF-M mount in any serious way and they have a massive investment in the EF catalog. If anything I think they will offer a variation of the EF-M mount that will be like the EF mount is to the EF-S mount. Also, if they offer a serious FF MILC that is targeted at professionals then having an EF mount is critical to its success, IMO. Otherwise, they would have to launch 5-10 new, high quality lenses along with the body and I don't think Canon will take a risk like this.

Lastly, we have seen that when it comes to professional, bright lenses the size/weight advantage of any MILC vanishes which further pushes the mount toward EF. I think it would be smart if Canon allowed the FF MILC to use EF-S lenses in a crop mode for the sensor. This would let a user take advantage of the small, lightweight, STM EF-S lenses they are offering. Basically, it would give the new FF MILC the ability to go small and lightweight if the user wanted to.

You actually made me wonder about this. I have the M3/M5 and they both work flawlessly with the adapter Canon provides so even if it was an EF-M Mount body, I know the adaptor wouldn't have an issue.

Now onto my crazy theory. With the current mounts, it's undeniable that EF gets more love than EF-S lenses. Now considering we have hardly had any new EF-M lenses and minimal EF-S lenses, what if this is because Canon shifted their focus onto FF EF-M lenses to launch alongside the new body? The body would have no issues using the EF-M adapter so we could have some lenses made just for the new mirrorless body as well as all our existing lenses.

It is just a wild theory but could be feasible too.

I think about anything is open for speculation right now. If you are right then it still doesn't explain why they virtually ignored the EF-M mount for its first four years. Maybe they are turning the EF-M mount into the mirrorless version of the EF-S mount. That is the will both be slaves to the EF mount. Just like when a person moves to FF from ASP-C DSLRs they forgo use of their EF-S lenses the EOS M APS-C user might have to do the same with their EF-M lenses. This would explain the lack of EF-M lenses, in general, and higher end ones.

When it comes to why they ignore the EF-M Mount for its first 4 years, there could be multiple reasons. They may have wanted to see how popular it would be before they invest money into r&d for more lenses. Canon may have expected people to mostly use their EF/EF-S lenses adapted with these bodies and figured more lenses could wait.

I know I'm 90% sure I'll be getting the FF Mirrorless once released and I have no problem using an adapter since I do that already with my M5. Considering G Master lenses are the same size as their Canon L lens counterparts, the main advantage of having them as an EF-M Mount (assuming Canon dont find some way to reduce the lens size while providing the same IQ) the only advantage would be that small weight and size saving you would get from not using an adapter.

I think the pecking order of the probability of Canon FF MILC mount is EF first, a new MILC FF mount second and the EF-M mount third. Knowing Canon's history of product differentiation, I don't think they want their flagship FF MILC(s) slumming around with an EF-M mount. Plus, there might be confusion between APS-C and FF EF-M lenses if the current batch of EF-M lenses will not work with a FF sensor.

i think current APS-c M will stay very compact ...if that's the case because of the laws physics we will not be getting F1.4 lenses

i think the FF MILC will not be compact ....well the body's may go down in size a bit, but its still going to be able to handle a 400mm F2.8

nnowak wrote:

justmeMN wrote:

Marty4650 wrote: Why wouldn't Canon want to sell their users brand new FF MILC lenses, rather than just letting them use FF DSLR lenses they already own?

Why would owners of Canon FF DSLRs want the expense of buying a whole new set of lenses?

And it would give Sony an opportunity to say "as long as you need to buy new lenses, you should switch to us, because we have more native lenses".

.... and better sensors, and better AF, and better video, and robust third party E mount lens support, and very functional EF adapters from Sigma and Metabones.

And better (richer, more dynamic and more authentic) colors, better high ISOs especially IBIS gain several stops with lenses without 'IS' as TS-E lenses shown, cleaner and more details in long exposed photos where Canon sensors falling apart - low DR, low S/N ratio and color shift if you push shadows aggressively as have seen. Canon not only needs mirrorless (if DSLR is so good why now both Nikon and Canon wants to jump into FF mirrorless bandwagon) but needs much better sensors.

Canon fanboys want you to believe DPAF is the best. It's NOT. Not only it is no match in AF-C (otherwise why Canon owners still shoot sport and BIF in OVF via separate AF/AE sensor), but also dual pixel now shows more negative than positive impact, and just unpractically many times holding a DSLR as a cellphone camera, under bright sunlight? Because of dual pixel, despite Canon also has sensor-side ADC, its best DR in 5D IV still less than 5-year-old A7's sensor, no mention in A7r II/III sensor. And it becomes a bigger and bigger burden to move double amount of pixels around that impacts IQ and limit burst rate and buffer depth. That's why 5Ds/R don't have DPAF, and wait and see if 5DsR II also will not have DPAF as it'd need to move 100mp data around otherwise that is a huge burden. Canon needs to adopt on-sensor hybrid AF (DPAF+CDAF) as everybody else does, but needs lots of R&D. In history Canon never good in CDAF as we have seen in its compact and M-series and no experience in on-sensor PDAF, so it's a huge capture-up task.

davev8 wrote:

PWPhotography wrote:

davev8 wrote:

RubberDials wrote:

PWPhotography wrote:

One lens I keep using as an example to have great benefits on e-mount is my favorite 17L/4.0 TS-E. No exaggeration if anyone actually try Canon TS-E lenses on e-mount, you'd agree it's just so much easier and lots more effective than on Canon EF-mount itself.

I shoot TS-E lenses (used to own 24L TS-E II also) as a P&S lens most times hand-held. My eye stays in EVF all the time even under bright sunlight. With Canon DSLRs, you'd have to use back LCD for precise MF that is unpractical in bright sunlight.

Then right in EVF, either with magnification toggle (1x/5x/10x with A7r II or 1x/7x/14x with A7r) or with focus peaking (very accurate so I use mostly these days), I can get precise MF in seconds. Well, on Canon DSLRs, you'd have to push button a few times to get into magnification.

If you use Tilt function, it's just so easy and effective with focus-peaking to get the best balance in end to end sharpness in seconds to achieve indefinite DOF (that something regular lenses just cannot even stop down to F22 which only deteriorates IQ). Well, on Canon DSLRs, it's a trial-and-error tedious practice. You'd better to use a third-party monitor plug-in hotshoe to get similar sort of focus peaking. Basically you'd have to shoot on tripod with Canon DSLRs (unpractical under bright sunlight) while I shoot mostly hand-held on A7-series.

Here is a sample that I am challenging Canon and Nikon DSLR owners with respective 17L TS-E or 19G PC-E lenses. I can easily to get pixel-level sharp photos at 1/6 sec (A7r III IBIS is even better) and can push to 1/4 sec. Try on 5DsR and D850 and let's compare hand-held as tripod is absolutely not allowed inside unless you have special privilege.

Very good points and the reason that ultimately all professional use will migrate to mirrorless systems.

it would be the reason if all pro only take photos of building that don't move

Mirrorless also can handle moving subjects such as on a moving eye or fast moving subjects in sports and wildlife as the latest models from mirrorless camp. This is only beginning, the beginning of the end of DSLR era in 10 years probably. Really nothing a DSLR can do, a mirrorless cannot do these days but only do more in some areas.

a was not referring to AF but IBIS wich was the main point being made with the above shot

Sure, IBIS is a huge advantage in many scenarios. But this is not mirrorless only advantage but also in speed because of no mirrorless obtable, eye-AF and even AF-C tracking with AF point covering entire frame. Eventually mirrorless AF will vastly surpass the best AF in DSLRs as the main sensor is much bigger than the separate small AF/AE sensor in DSLRs and you can add more and more AF points inside, and can imagine cross-point AF points soon. As I said it's only beginning while DSLR has reached its design limit and no room can further improve. D850 is the last glory of DSLR we can see.

Another sample with EF 24-70L/2.8 II @1/5 sec hand-held in GCT hall. I shot 5D, 5D2/ 5D3 in the same place many times in the past, never could take at such low shutter, and never can lift shadow and brighten photos that much without adding lots of noises. A7r II colors also much better and authentic than photos from 5D-series. I could post and have side by side comparison if necessary. I know a particular Sony basher using colors as an excuse everytime and talking as a self-claimed color 'expert' but all scientific lab tests show otherwise that Sony Exmor sensors have better color tonality and more authentic colors.

EF 24-70L/2.8 II, hand-held at 1/5 sec in the Grand Central Terminal hall

nice photo

Great photo PW!

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com

-- hide signature --

My 5D IS a MK1 classic
..........................................................................................................
There is no argument for FF vs APS-c (or m43) with shallow DOF..as it's a law of physics and a very subjective personal thing if you want to make use of the shallow DOF only FF can offer
...........................................................................................................
Political correctness....somebody being offended on someone else's behalf....who that someone doesn't give a damn in the first place ....David Appleton
..................................................................................................
quoting irrefutable facts may get you branded a racist ..even if no race is involved .......David Appleton

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com

-- hide signature --

My 5D IS a MK1 classic
..........................................................................................................
There is no argument for FF vs APS-c (or m43) with shallow DOF..as it's a law of physics and a very subjective personal thing if you want to make use of the shallow DOF only FF can offer
...........................................................................................................
Political correctness....somebody being offended on someone else's behalf....who that someone doesn't give a damn in the first place ....David Appleton
..................................................................................................
quoting irrefutable facts may get you branded a racist ..even if no race is involved .......David Appleton