Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rumours about Canon mirrorless...
#31
 I still have extreme difficulty in believing that it is that hard to make a simple, (what is effectively an extension tube), that can mount an F mount lens on a new Nikon ML camera, regardless of the sensor resolution or it's electrical necessities, a simple pair of calipers can measure any errors in alignment.

  Compare that with say the construction of a 24-70mm F2.8 or the 105mm F1.4 with all the lens grinding accuracy needed, exact couplet and triplet glued alignment, inner tube/outer tubes, mounting of elements, VR and bayonet exactitudes etc..

    Or the simple ball race that enables our world transport to function, is of far far greater precision...made in their zillions daily....there you are into the realms of engineering "lapping" of surfaces!

  I understand what you are saying JoJu, but frankly I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill here!

 

    All that is so much more difficult to accomplish than a plain extension tube, if Nikon cannot achieve that, they might as well pack up and start up a Japanese restaurant chain! 

  

  Actually now you mention it.........

Dave's clichés
#32
At this stage it's worth mentioning that users may be loyal to companies but companies are never loyal to users.

 

See Samsung (NX- & NX-mini), Nikon 1, Four-Thirds, (plus historically Oympus OM, Canon FD, Minolta MD, Leica R, etc).

 

Next in line: Canon EF-M, Pentax Q, Sony A, Leica T

#33
Tilts do not make unsharpness (just a focus plane on a tilt). See tilt shift lenses. Decentering an element, or titling one element, will create unsharpness.

 

Tilts with adapters never will be measured in degrees, but rather in fractions of a degree. One will never notice such a fraction of a degree tilt of the focus plane unless one is photographing MTF charts.

#34
Quote:At this stage it's worth mentioning that users may be loyal to companies but companies are never loyal to users.

 

See Samsung (NX- & NX-mini), Nikon 1, Four-Thirds, (plus historically Oympus OM, Canon FD, Minolta MD, Leica R, etc).

 

Next in line: Canon EF-M, Pentax Q, Sony A, Leica T
Canon EF-M APS-C is just as likely to disappear as Sony E mount APS-C version.

#35
Quote:Canon EF-M APS-C is just as likely to disappear as Sony E mount APS-C version.
 

EF-M is irrelevant outside of Japan.

Once Canon has released its full format system, this one will be gone soon thereafter.

#36
Quote:At this stage it's worth mentioning that users may be loyal to companies but companies are never loyal to users.

 

See Samsung (NX- & NX-mini), Nikon 1, Four-Thirds, (plus historically Oympus OM, Canon FD, Minolta MD, Leica R, etc).

 

Next in line: Canon EF-M, Pentax Q, Sony A, Leica T
 

And outside of photography but part of the contemporary workflow: Apple who were always very "independent" on how much users invest in their "latest technology", be it FireWire, CinemaDisplays, certain hardware for iPodPadPhone - incredible how much user money this company dumped in the bin. Okay, there's always a risk for the one first coming out with a new "standard" and no user is forced to invest in "latest tech".

 

dave, with calipers you can't measure down to 0.01 mm reliably. I should take the converter which is neither worn out or malfunctioning to the grinding-lab where they can measure down to 0.1 µm and find out how parallel it really is. Again, even given the outmost perfect manufacturing, an adapter is always only second best. If you enjoy  little read about that:

 

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09...-adapters/
#37
Quote:EF-M is irrelevant outside of Japan.

Once Canon has released its full format system, this one will be gone soon thereafter.
Just like EF-S disappeared after the 5D and 6D series, right?

 

On Amazon.com Canon EF-M kits rank number 5, 11 and 13 when I looked just now.

 

On a related note: the EF-M mount diameter is the same size as the Sony E-mount diameter, larger than the Fuji X diameter. So if Canon deems in pertinent, they can choose to use the EF-M mount for a mirrorless FF model.
#38
Quote:Just like EF-S disappeared after the 5D and 6D series, right?

 

On Amazon.com Canon EF-M kits rank number 5, 11 and 13 when I looked just now.

 

On a related note: the EF-M mount diameter is the same size as the Sony E-mount diameter, larger than the Fuji X diameter. So if Canon deems in pertinent, they can choose to use the EF-M mount for a mirrorless FF model.
 

And you think they'll battle Sony on a ground where Sony is years ahead ?

If they are something bigger from scratch why should they stick to 36x24 ? Just because of the EF-M constraint?

And a different perspective on your statement - the best selling Canon mirrorless camera - body only - is on rank 35.

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Elec...2556502011

 

And if you look closely ... the EOS M5 is on rank 42 in the bundle section. The awesome YI M1 is on rank 21 ... just in case you argue that bundles are more popular. In the top 10 there are two invalid entries, and 5 deprecated models (aka cheap).

 

Anyway, Canon will not hesitate a second to abandon EF-M if that makes sense business wise. Which comes back to the fact that companies aren't loyal to customers.

#39
Quote:And you think they'll battle Sony on a ground where Sony is years ahead ?

If they are something bigger from scratch why should they stick to 36x24 ? Just because of the EF-M constraint?

And a different perspective on your statement - the best selling Canon mirrorless camera - body only - is on rank 35.

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Elec...2556502011

 

And if you look closely ... the EOS M5 is on rank 42 in the bundle section. The awesome YI M1 is on rank 21 ... just in case you argue that bundles are more popular. In the top 10 there are two invalid entries, and 5 deprecated models (aka cheap).
Of course Canon will stick to 36x24mm, if they would decide that they want to make a FF mirrorless platform. Because 135 format is a format with a very large base of users, it is very popular (ever since the 1950's). Their main lens line is for 135 format, and with a simple adapter one has all these lenses already available.

And who knows, maybe Canon may be thinking of also a bigger sensor specialty camera, and it will be anyone's guess what kind of sensor such a camera would have (only sure thing is that it would have a Canon sensor).

 

Canon's execs said in the past that they think that mirrorless only makes sense when you do it compact, since that is the advantage of mirrorless.

From that you can derive: they are not that stupid as the people who claim Canon would make mirrorless with a mirrorbox sans mirror. Also, that they were not yet thinking about FF mirrorless at the time of the interviews.

 

Most mirrorless buyers buy a kit, by the way. Just because else they have a body without a lens to start. Upgraders on the same platform are the ones usually buying body only.
#40
Following your argument there are a magnitude more YI M1 users than EOS M5/M6 users out there. Even the Nikon 1 J5 outperforms those two cameras by a margin then. I'm stunned by Canon's success in the US ...  Big Grin

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)