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

[Peter Nelson]

Great thread! Where have you two been all these years?

I know the German Leica M39 is different than the Russian M39 because the Russians used the Zeiss Contax threading often times. They still mount and work but the total rotation to lock in the lens ends up with the aperture and distance scales not on the top for easy viewing.
What is the Zeiss Contarax screw thread mount?

yes, I know thanks for catching it up, it should read:

• Canon screw: FD=28.8mm, screw M39x1mm
• Leica screw: FD=28.8mm too, BUT... screw M39×26tpi
• Leica M: FD=27.95, bayonet mount

I didn't calculate, but perhaps M39x26tpi (turns per inch) thread is slightly
different than the metric screw M39x1;

all the rest is correct, with the exception that Pentax/Practica M42 lenses
with mechanical aperture lever are not electronically setable , I've
five or six of them.

the most complete table of FDs I know about can be found here:
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

and for most lenses with FD longer than 44mm there are adapters
available allowing them to be mounted on EF EOS bodies. Even for
Exakta/Topcon with FD=44.7mm, which means only 0.7mm diff.
it is doable, although precision tolerances are pretty tight - the
Tessar 50/2.8 T from mine example above is mounted through
such an adapter;

substituting M42x1 for M39x1 was sort of a Freudian slip

jpr2
--
~
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!
~

--
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]

A new Canon FF digital ILMC system would be more convinving to the FF DSLR owners that this new system has a future. At the same time crop cameras will appeal to everyone.

FF will be better for 20mm, 24mm wide angle and semi wide lenses such as 28mm and 35mm as well as normal 50mm and mid tele lenses of 85mm/90mm and up to 135mm. That's why FF because most photography is done in these FL's.

FF would only be better in terms of thinner DOF and 1 stop better noise. Otherwise if it's APS-C they will simply invent new lenses for this system which will cover those equivalent focal lengths. 15mm, 31mm, etc.

The reality of any Canon MILC system is that APS-C will be more marketable and therefore more likely. Both in terms of price and also the fact that the lenses will be attractive to use on other APS-C bodies (with an adapter).

Not EOS EF lenses. A new sytem of lenses designed specifically for the new mirroress ILC FF bodies. Yes there can be cropped sensored bodies that can use these new lenses from Canon.

Agreed. But FF lenses on APS-C don't make as much sense. 24mm becomes 38mm, etc, which is kind of weird.

--
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

 

[jpr2]

Show me, please. BTW the adapters that would not provide infinity focusing were never considered by myself. As were the adapters that are micro focus only were also never considered by myself. What I meant when I said that I could not locate an M39 and M adapter to EOS EF mount was that I could not locate anything that would work normally. Please, please, if you know of such an adapter then post a link here for me to see and make the purchase.

IF and only IF you'd be willing to have your mirror in permanent locked
up position, than yes, it can be done - by recessing your 28.8 flange
lenses 15.2mm deep into EF body (roughly speaking - some will be
too large on their barrels), or 27.95mm M-mount lenses a bit deeper
at 16.05mm ;

I have an M42 German Made Mayer-Oreston Gorlitz 50mm f/1.8 with such a Tab and it's the sharpest lens I have ever used bar none. It's abiut the size of Canons EF Nifty Fifty 50mm f/1.8.

oh dear - I have this one too, incredibly sharp indeed, mine is in
Exakta mount, but all the rest is identical.
--
~
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!
~

 

[jpr2]

OK, I found the exact measurements for Leica screw mount it is
M39x0.977mm, so the difference is tiny and yet it explains perfectly
why the scales are in awkward position (also, the effects of forcing
such a mismatched screws are potentially dire - very easily it can
lead to transmutation from interchangeable to FIXED lens )

Great thread! Where have you two been all these years?

I know the German Leica M39 is different than the Russian M39 because the Russians used the Zeiss Contax threading often times. They still mount and work but the total rotation to lock in the lens ends up with the aperture and distance scales not on the top for easy viewing.
What is the Zeiss Contarax screw thread mount?

it is spelled Contarex:
http://home.sprynet.com/~stspring/Zeiss%20Ikon.html



jpr2

yes, I know thanks for catching it up, it should read:

• Canon screw: FD=28.8mm, screw M39x1mm
• Leica screw: FD=28.8mm too, BUT... screw M39×26tpi
• Leica M: FD=27.95, bayonet mount

I didn't calculate, but perhaps M39x26tpi (turns per inch) thread is slightly
different than the metric screw M39x1;

all the rest is correct, with the exception that Pentax/Practica M42 lenses
with mechanical aperture lever are not electronically setable , I've
five or six of them.

the most complete table of FDs I know about can be found here:
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

and for most lenses with FD longer than 44mm there are adapters
available allowing them to be mounted on EF EOS bodies. Even for
Exakta/Topcon with FD=44.7mm, which means only 0.7mm diff.
it is doable, although precision tolerances are pretty tight - the
Tessar 50/2.8 T from mine example above is mounted through
such an adapter;

substituting M42x1 for M39x1 was sort of a Freudian slip

jpr2

--
~
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!
~

 

[JackM]

A new Canon FF digital ILMC system would be more convinving to the FF DSLR owners that this new system has a future. At the same time crop cameras will appeal to everyone.

That's fine and I would hope to be able to buy one, but just realize you're talking about a niche (FF) within a niche (MILC) product. And then another niche within that for manual-focus primes. If it comes to fruition we'll probably be looking at near-Leica level prices, and then I'm out. 5DII and L level prices, I'm in.

By the way I don't see APS-C going away any time soon, if ever.

 

[jpr2]

...it is not screw but rather a bayonet type:



I didn't visit the SLR wiki pages for quite a time, but it turns out it
has progressed significantly - a veritable font of various [surprising
sometimes] tidbits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_single-lens_reflex_camera

jpr2
--
~
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!
~

 

[Peter Nelson]

Nice Cyclops!

The trick for me has been to only snug the lens into position and if it get's a little loose in use to just resnug the lens. I'm a retired mechanical designer and I respect the subtle difference in the thread mounts.

Thanks for the info, I used to know this stuff but it's been a while so I can not recall it easily from memory.

Great thread! Where have you two been all these years?

I know the German Leica M39 is different than the Russian M39 because the Russians used the Zeiss Contax threading often times. They still mount and work but the total rotation to lock in the lens ends up with the aperture and distance scales not on the top for easy viewing.
What is the Zeiss Contarax screw thread mount?

it is spelled Contarex:
http://home.sprynet.com/~stspring/Zeiss%20Ikon.html



jpr2

yes, I know thanks for catching it up, it should read:

• Canon screw: FD=28.8mm, screw M39x1mm
• Leica screw: FD=28.8mm too, BUT... screw M39×26tpi
• Leica M: FD=27.95, bayonet mount

I didn't calculate, but perhaps M39x26tpi (turns per inch) thread is slightly
different than the metric screw M39x1;

all the rest is correct, with the exception that Pentax/Practica M42 lenses
with mechanical aperture lever are not electronically setable , I've
five or six of them.

the most complete table of FDs I know about can be found here:
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

and for most lenses with FD longer than 44mm there are adapters
available allowing them to be mounted on EF EOS bodies. Even for
Exakta/Topcon with FD=44.7mm, which means only 0.7mm diff.
it is doable, although precision tolerances are pretty tight - the
Tessar 50/2.8 T from mine example above is mounted through
such an adapter;

substituting M42x1 for M39x1 was sort of a Freudian slip

jpr2

--
~
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!
~

--
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]

mmmm...I thought there was also a screw mount from Zies that people sometimes tried to mount Leica M39 threaded lenses onto. This would bring about problems.
I think the camera shown here is another mount as you noted-a bayonet mount.

...it is not screw but rather a bayonet type:



I didn't visit the SLR wiki pages for quite a time, but it turns out it
has progressed significantly - a veritable font of various [surprising
sometimes] tidbits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_single-lens_reflex_camera

jpr2
--
~
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!
~

--
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]

I do not think I would use my DSLR's this way. I might, but probably not.

So you have the same lens but in Exacta Mount. That's a coincidence.

Mine focuses to less than 1 ft and the focusing ring rotates almost 360 degrees from lock to lock ensureing extreamly accurate and fine focus. Wonerfull lens, among my favorites. Only my first version Leica Summilux 50mm f/1.4 Summilux and somrtimes the first version of the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L lens are more hightly regarded in my eyes. Believe it or not by a real old Russian made copy of the Leica 50mm f/3.5 Elmar collapsible lens is also very high on my favorite lens list. That's because it has such a thin blue coating and the original Max Berek optical formula and this produces the most unique and individual photographs out of all my 50+ lenses. It's an old lens with the f/18 f stop which I think is pre WWII.

When I got it the Russian's has polished/stripped off the outer silver color plated metal to expose only the original brass metal. It looks real old timey on my cameras.

Show me, please. BTW the adapters that would not provide infinity focusing were never considered by myself. As were the adapters that are micro focus only were also never considered by myself. What I meant when I said that I could not locate an M39 and M adapter to EOS EF mount was that I could not locate anything that would work normally. Please, please, if you know of such an adapter then post a link here for me to see and make the purchase.

IF and only IF you'd be willing to have your mirror in permanent locked
up position, than yes, it can be done - by recessing your 28.8 flange
lenses 15.2mm deep into EF body (roughly speaking - some will be
too large on their barrels), or 27.95mm M-mount lenses a bit deeper
at 16.05mm ;

I have an M42 German Made Mayer-Oreston Gorlitz 50mm f/1.8 with such a Tab and it's the sharpest lens I have ever used bar none. It's abiut the size of Canons EF Nifty Fifty 50mm f/1.8.

oh dear - I have this one too, incredibly sharp indeed, mine is in
Exakta mount, but all the rest is identical.
--
~
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!
~

--
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]

Canon can sell a FF digital rangefinder at 5DII prices and the crop sensored versions at 7D prices or even less as time goes by.

A new Canon FF digital ILMC system would be more convinving to the FF DSLR owners that this new system has a future. At the same time crop cameras will appeal to everyone.

That's fine and I would hope to be able to buy one, but just realize you're talking about a niche (FF) within a niche (MILC) product. And then another niche within that for manual-focus primes. If it comes to fruition we'll probably be looking at near-Leica level prices, and then I'm out. 5DII and L level prices, I'm in.

By the way I don't see APS-C going away any time soon, if ever.

--
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

 

[jpr2]

mmmm... I thought there was also a screw mount from Zies that people sometimes tried to mount Leica M39 threaded lenses onto. This would bring about problems.

as far as I know there were only two Zeiss screw threads;

by some strange vagaries of fate:

• what is now widely known as Pentax screw mount, was actually introduced by Zeiss for Praktica line (yes... M42 );
• and the other one: 0.8"-36 Whitworth thread, was originated by Royal Microscopical Society, but now is mostly known as RMS Zeiss screw mount (but as Luminars were meant for microscopy, they lack a focusing cam, so either microscope tube, or a set of bellows is needed for photograhy);

jpr2
--
~
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!
~

 

[jpr2]

...than the FF one, and yet preserve the minimal requirements:

• interchangeable lenses;
• ability of free hand shooting, using some kind of viewfinder (shooting at arms length using back screen, even with a stabilized system, introduces too much of a compromise, esp. with longer lenses; possible solution: to use a tripod, and a black cape cutting reflections and glare - would revert us to beginnings of photography);
• OVF much preferable to EVF; a dual system offering both might be a possible compromise;
• not compromised manual focusing: using directly a focusing ring with enough throw (so far none of the offers for focusing by wire was 100% foolproof);
• pocketability; BUT this might be at odds with another important requirement: capable of delivering a paper thin DOF as well.

Peter, you're engineering oriented - can you give some rough ideas?

jpr2

A new Canon FF digital ILMC system would be more convinving to the FF DSLR owners that this new system has a future. At the same time crop cameras will appeal to everyone.

That's fine and I would hope to be able to buy one, but just realize you're talking about a niche (FF) within a niche (MILC) product. And then another niche within that for manual-focus primes. If it comes to fruition we'll probably be looking at near-Leica level prices, and then I'm out. 5DII and L level prices, I'm in.

By the way I don't see APS-C going away any time soon, if ever.

--
~
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!
~

 

[JackM]

...than the FF one, and yet preserve the minimal requirements:

• interchangeable lenses;

I am just concerned that an FF system would be too big. M4/3 and Sony MILCs are already not pocketable with anything but short fast primes.

• ability of free hand shooting, using some kind of viewfinder (shooting at arms length using back screen, even with a stabilized system, introduces too much of a compromise, esp. with longer lenses; possible solution: to use a tripod, and a black cape cutting reflections and glare - would revert us to beginnings of photography);

what?

• OVF much preferable to EVF; a dual system offering both might be a possible compromise;

Yeah. If only the X100 took interchangeable lenses.

• not compromised manual focusing: using directly a focusing ring with enough throw (so far none of the offers for focusing by wire was 100% foolproof);

agreed.

• pocketability; BUT this might be at odds with another important requirement: capable of delivering a paper thin DOF as well.

APS-C and a fast prime can do thin DOF...

 

[JackM]

check out my Leica IIIf set I posted today here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1038&message=38935760

 

[Peter Nelson]

I was thinking the FF and APS-C sensored camera body would be the same size as the original Barnak camera bodies. No need to make them smaller.

By offering both FF and APS-C sensores I would think Canon would be offering in the very begginning a two tier system. The FF sensored cameras would work correctly wioth the new Canon native 35mm FL pocket lenses and would cost more. The APS-C would offer a longer FL for the same new lenses from Canon and would be priced less.

So this is much the same as the current Canon DSLR stratagy. Possible in the future if thier is a demand Canon could introduce a smaller body with an even smaller sensor and smaller lenses. This would be for a cost only reason.

The Barnak bodies are truly pocketable so I see no reason for the FF and APS-C sensored versions to be smaller. These cameras would be just a little smaller than my Olympus E-P1. Canon's versions will have the intregated optical viewfinder/rangefinder with framelines as well as a high resolution Live view EVF. Also Canon will have external controls like the G10/11/12 series. External control knobs for ISO, Tv, WB and Exp. Comp. As well as manual focusing lenses with aperture click stops and inscribed aperture values and distance scales on the lens barrel. With an AF switch and both primes and zoom lenses. Everything smaller than current DSLR's.
-Peter

• interchangeable lenses;
• ability of free hand shooting, using some kind of viewfinder (shooting at arms length using back screen, even with a stabilized system, introduces too much of a compromise, esp. with longer lenses; possible solution: to use a tripod, and a black cape cutting reflections and glare - would revert us to beginnings of photography);
• OVF much preferable to EVF; a dual system offering both might be a possible compromise;
• not compromised manual focusing: using directly a focusing ring with enough throw (so far none of the offers for focusing by wire was 100% foolproof);
• pocketability; BUT this might be at odds with another important requirement: capable of delivering a paper thin DOF as well.

Peter, you're engineering oriented - can you give some rough ideas?

jpr2

A new Canon FF digital ILMC system would be more convinving to the FF DSLR owners that this new system has a future. At the same time crop cameras will appeal to everyone.

That's fine and I would hope to be able to buy one, but just realize you're talking about a niche (FF) within a niche (MILC) product. And then another niche within that for manual-focus primes. If it comes to fruition we'll probably be looking at near-Leica level prices, and then I'm out. 5DII and L level prices, I'm in.

By the way I don't see APS-C going away any time soon, if ever.

--
~
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!
~

--
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

 

[Kabe Luna]

for any new camera system I'd invest in:

1) 35mm-sized sensor (if I wanted smaller, the m4/3 brigade are already doing a super job and are pretty reasonably-priced)
2) Image proportions closer to 4:5

3) Optical viewfinder (not interested in shooting via monitor and chewing through batteries like energy is free and abundant)
4) Relatively small, bright lenses

5) Enough external controls that I could shoot all day without needing to visit the menu

I doubt Canon will be the company to deliver on all these, especially the external controls as their tendency is to reduce controls to make designs less intimidating for tyros and to save themselves money. I'm also not sure Canon cares enough about optical viewfinders or manufacturing precision to pull off a durable and accurate rangefinder design for an ILC at a consumer-friendly price point (actually, I'm not sure any manufacturer could).

--
- -
Kabe Luna

http://www.garlandcary.com

 

[jpr2]

1) 35mm-sized sensor (if I wanted smaller, the m4/3 brigade are already doing a super job and are pretty reasonably-priced)

perhaps I'm not up to date, but... is there any m4/3 body with a state
of the art, excellent OVF???

2) Image proportions closer to 4:5

or even suare!!

3) Optical viewfinder (not interested in shooting via monitor and chewing through batteries like energy is free and abundant)

exactly the same here

4) Relatively small, bright lenses

the smaller the better, BUT bright is paramount indeed

5) Enough external controls that I could shoot all day without needing to visit the menu

a deal breaker - I'd like to have all essential controls to be as external, retro,
and as directly accessible as possible;

An important addition to the list - a quick and accurate AF (preferably
PDAF, as CDAF is still lagging behind in speed); If we omit AF than some
might argue that M9 already delivers

I'm also not sure Canon cares enough about optical viewfinders or manufacturing precision to pull off a durable and accurate rangefinder design for an ILC at a consumer-friendly price point (actually, I'm not sure any manufacturer could).

give them time and room to evolve: for a long time it was a Top --> Down
development, with features seeping down to lower models, but establishing
first a common canon (pun intended) of essential features. Alas, now the
trend is reversed, with lesser models dominating, and essentials getting
lost in a process, never evolving to "top" = with most egregious being
forced to shoot at arms length - yuck . So, for a compact model, BUT...
fulfilling all the above I'd be willing to give a good price (say, the same as
for x100, BUT with all quirks in FW ironed out, AND interchangeable
lenses as a minimum),

jpr2
--
~
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!
~

 

[Peter Nelson]

Your list is very close to my requirements, just not described in the same detail that I have done. Check my OP and subsequent posts if you want all the details.

I'm thinking FF Canon ILC pocketable for $2,000.
APS-C version for $1,000.
Smaller than half frame for $500.

These small ILC cameras are said by DPR to be the fastest growing segment in many countries.

for any new camera system I'd invest in:

1) 35mm-sized sensor (if I wanted smaller, the m4/3 brigade are already doing a super job and are pretty reasonably-priced)
2) Image proportions closer to 4:5

3) Optical viewfinder (not interested in shooting via monitor and chewing through batteries like energy is free and abundant)
4) Relatively small, bright lenses

5) Enough external controls that I could shoot all day without needing to visit the menu

I doubt Canon will be the company to deliver on all these, especially the external controls as their tendency is to reduce controls to make designs less intimidating for tyros and to save themselves money. I'm also not sure Canon cares enough about optical viewfinders or manufacturing precision to pull off a durable and accurate rangefinder design for an ILC at a consumer-friendly price point (actually, I'm not sure any manufacturer could).

--
- -
Kabe Luna

http://www.garlandcary.com

--
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]

jpr2,

All good concepts and hopefully to be implemented in the new Canon Pocket camera systems.

1) 35mm-sized sensor (if I wanted smaller, the m4/3 brigade are already doing a super job and are pretty reasonably-priced)

perhaps I'm not up to date, but... is there any m4/3 body with a state
of the art, excellent OVF???

2) Image proportions closer to 4:5

or even suare!!

3) Optical viewfinder (not interested in shooting via monitor and chewing through batteries like energy is free and abundant)

exactly the same here

4) Relatively small, bright lenses

the smaller the better, BUT bright is paramount indeed

5) Enough external controls that I could shoot all day without needing to visit the menu

a deal breaker - I'd like to have all essential controls to be as external, retro,
and as directly accessible as possible;

An important addition to the list - a quick and accurate AF (preferably
PDAF, as CDAF is still lagging behind in speed); If we omit AF than some
might argue that M9 already delivers

I'm also not sure Canon cares enough about optical viewfinders or manufacturing precision to pull off a durable and accurate rangefinder design for an ILC at a consumer-friendly price point (actually, I'm not sure any manufacturer could).

give them time and room to evolve: for a long time it was a Top --> Down
development, with features seeping down to lower models, but establishing
first a common canon (pun intended) of essential features. Alas, now the
trend is reversed, with lesser models dominating, and essentials getting
lost in a process, never evolving to "top" = with most egregious being
forced to shoot at arms length - yuck . So, for a compact model, BUT...
fulfilling all the above I'd be willing to give a good price (say, the same as
for x100, BUT with all quirks in FW ironed out, AND interchangeable
lenses as a minimum),

jpr2
--
~
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!
~

--
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

 

[jpr2]

...no, I don't think this way of reasoning is correct:

I was thinking the FF and APS-C sensored camera body would be the same size as the original Barnak camera bodies. No need to make them smaller.

here we don't agree - smaller size for the APS-C line would be definite
plus, and quite an advantage over FF line; CMOS 1.6x sensors are
getting better with each iteration and gap is closing pretty rapidly;
differentiate the same sized bodies by putting different size
sensors into them seems like a pretty weird idea if the over all goal
is to reach a best overall pocketability

jpr2

• interchangeable lenses;
• ability of free hand shooting, using some kind of viewfinder (shooting at arms length using back screen, even with a stabilized system, introduces too much of a compromise, esp. with longer lenses; possible solution: to use a tripod, and a black cape cutting reflections and glare - would revert us to beginnings of photography);
• OVF much preferable to EVF; a dual system offering both might be a possible compromise;
• not compromised manual focusing: using directly a focusing ring with enough throw (so far none of the offers for focusing by wire was 100% foolproof);
• pocketability; BUT this might be at odds with another important requirement: capable of delivering a paper thin DOF as well.

Peter, you're engineering oriented - can you give some rough ideas?

jpr2

A new Canon FF digital ILMC system would be more convinving to the FF DSLR owners that this new system has a future. At the same time crop cameras will appeal to everyone.

That's fine and I would hope to be able to buy one, but just realize you're talking about a niche (FF) within a niche (MILC) product. And then another niche within that for manual-focus primes. If it comes to fruition we'll probably be looking at near-Leica level prices, and then I'm out. 5DII and L level prices, I'm in.

By the way I don't see APS-C going away any time soon, if ever.

--
~
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!
~

--
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

--
~
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!
~