# Canon is going to add mid format



## M.ST (Aug 12, 2013)

Yes. It´s true.

Canon is looking for a mid format brand and in negotiations with one of them.


----------



## J.R. (Aug 12, 2013)

Source?

Also whether CR1, CR2 ... what?


----------



## Haydn1971 (Aug 12, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Source?
> 
> Also whether CR1, CR2 ... what?



Front page of CR is a good place to start - no CR number though - personally, I'm not convinced, MF is better, but one wonders if the investment would be more about killing the competition ?


----------



## bycostello (Aug 12, 2013)

i've enough mps... can't see the point of any more unless shooting for advertising or something...


----------



## zim (Aug 12, 2013)

bycostello said:


> i've enough mps... can't see the point of any more unless shooting for advertising or something...



I agree, was wondering though if there could be any tech that would come with the acquisition that would be more useful that the actual format?


----------



## Caps18 (Aug 12, 2013)

I'm sure landscape photographers and Gigapan people will welcome this news. 

I wonder if Nikon would have to buy a different Medium Format company if this happens.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 12, 2013)

It's not the body it's the Lenses. A medium format body has a lot more space to fit in all the electronics than a DSLR does..... And Canon already is very good at packaging DSLR's. realistically, take a 1DX, slap in a larger sensor and fit the electronics into a bigger body, and you have a medium format camera.

The problem is lenses. Canon would have to come out with another complete line of high end lenses... And that takes time to design and facilities to manufacture... And at the same time as it is trying to update most of it's L-glass and already running into production volume problems.

I can't see Canon starting from scratch, but I can see them going into business with Hasselbad and thereby getting access to a lot of fine lenses. If Canon does come out with a body, my bet is that Hasselbad lenses will mount on it.


----------



## LewisShermer (Aug 12, 2013)

I was discussing this a few months ago on this forum and was basically shot down...

It would be great to have a medium format canon series. Yes it would probably just be for professionals and no you don't need the extra pixels for weddings/sports/birds in flight. I know I need them for larger billboards in airports or down the sides of buildings. A price point around the £8,000 to £12,000 mark would be great as it'll be lower than the hasselblads. an all in 1 system would be great rather than the phase 1/mamiya separates system. I want a massive mirror with a huge loud flop and I want to have the old school look down view finder.

Yes they'd make/design new lenses. But that's what a company does, builds stuff and we buy it if it fits out needs. MF is the new FF and I welcome it's possible return to affordableness.


----------



## tron (Aug 12, 2013)

Why not, only they haven't completely done some basics first: upgrade 100-400, 400 5.6, 35 1.4, create a 24 1.4 III with less vignetting and MUCH LESS coma, upgrade the 45 and 90 TS lenses, improve their sensors, improve their DO lenses, to name a few ;D 

Granted they have done a lot and I am a Canon fan but still there is room for improvement ... :


----------



## Danielle (Aug 12, 2013)

I find this news interesting. Could be great news depending where it leads.

However if its hasselblad, that may not be so easy. Hasselblad is in partnership with Carl Zeiss. I'm willing to suggest without them, it will be a partnership with death. Schneider Kreuznach will no doubt not touch them, this leaves what logical option? I can think of one, but it's unlikely.

Medium format being possibly affordable? No, I wouldn't be betting that regardless.

I could be wrong, but this sounds like a big hypothetical rumour. That's it.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 12, 2013)

LewisShermer said:


> I was discussing this a few months ago on this forum and was basically shot down...
> 
> It would be great to have a medium format canon series. Yes it would probably just be for professionals and no you don't need the extra pixels for weddings/sports/birds in flight. I know I need them for larger billboards in airports or down the sides of buildings. A price point around the £8,000 to £12,000 mark would be great as it'll be lower than the hasselblads. an all in 1 system would be great rather than the phase 1/mamiya separates system. I want a massive mirror with a huge loud flop and I want to have the old school look down view finder.
> 
> Yes they'd make/design new lenses. But that's what a company does, builds stuff and we buy it if it fits out needs. MF is the new FF and I welcome it's possible return to affordableness.



I think it would take a monumental effort to start from scratch.... Not saying they couldn't, but it would be hard. That's why I see some kind of deal with Hasselbad as a likely sign.

Look at micro four thirds.... Several second tier companies got together, cooperated, and they are now the dominant player in mirror less cameras.... The lenses can go anywhere.... Why not the same for FF?

Think about it.... Canon makes a deal with Hasselbad to share the mount.... Canon makes a medium format body and starts selling it. MF sales jump, Hasselbad bodies might take a drop in sales, but the lens sales would skyrocket.... Both companies make out like bandits....

P.S.... If you carried around a 4X5 camera and a stack of film holders, medium format is tiny.


----------



## deleteme (Aug 12, 2013)

While Canon could easily purchase any one of the struggling MF manufacturers I see no compelling reasons to do so. Unit sales for the entire category are tiny.
They could bring the price down like Pentax did with their 645D but that didn't really convince many to step up to MF. Reducing price would further pressure them to meet higher sales volumes.

The only reason is to pick the pockets of hobbyists who believe that a bulky, slow and expensive camera system will magically transform their LOLcat photos into art.
The IQ issues are not relevant even for images printed large in an art gallery. Billboards can (and have been done) with 5MP cameras to great effect.
The IQ race is largely over, we are now just quibbling about the smallest details that, in truth, are largely invisible. It is true that some studio applications are still better served by MF but then that is also in conjunction with a view camera.

So tell me again why MF has a future?
BTW, I have used digital MF and come from a history of view camera and medium format ownership and use so I have seen the the world change. IMO it has been all for the best.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 12, 2013)

Keep in mind that this may be a purely financial move on Canon's part. It's possible (probable, even) that if they buy an established medium format brand, they won't rebrand the line as Canon, but rather keep the current brand intact, but streamline marketing and distribution channels to save costs and increase profit.


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 12, 2013)

Nice. I would like to use leaf shutters again.  Maybe bugeted version like a the Pentax 645D.


----------



## LewisShermer (Aug 12, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> LewisShermer said:
> 
> 
> > I was discussing this a few months ago on this forum and was basically shot down...
> ...



Yeah, that's why I find it hard to comprehend people complaining about the size and weight of a 5D


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 12, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Keep in mind that this may be a purely financial move on Canon's part. It's possible (probable, even) that if they buy an established medium format brand, they won't rebrand the line as Canon, but rather keep the current brand intact, but streamline marketing and distribution channels to save costs and increase profit.


There have been Rumors for Years posted on NL. He specifically asked for MF rumors a couple of days earlier, that brings out those who like to fabricate rumors in droves. If Canon decided to get into MF, it would be more PR than profit making, something to show that they have a bigger selection than others. 
The Phase one cameras, I believe, use the Mamiya 645 lens mount, and lenses are made by a third party. I doubt if Canon really wants to sell cameras that use a third party lens, so they might need to buy Schneider Kreuznach which also owns B&W and Century Optics. It becomes a bit of a minefield then, depending on a German company for lenses for a camera made in Denmark. Canon likes to own and run the entire supply chain.


----------



## Danielle (Aug 12, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Keep in mind that this may be a purely financial move on Canon's part. It's possible (probable, even) that if they buy an established medium format brand, they won't rebrand the line as Canon, but rather keep the current brand intact, but streamline marketing and distribution channels to save costs and increase profit.




Agreed. That thought crossed my mind after I posted too.


----------



## deleteme (Aug 13, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Keep in mind that this may be a purely financial move on Canon's part. It's possible (probable, even) that if they buy an established medium format brand, they won't rebrand the line as Canon, but rather keep the current brand intact, but streamline marketing and distribution channels to save costs and increase profit.


But they would still be stuck with a shrinking market. I also believe that the books they look at will astonish them at how parlous the MF market is.
Things always look better from the outside.
OTOH maybe they want to buy C1 and get all that CC switcher business.


----------



## moreorless (Aug 13, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> LewisShermer said:
> 
> 
> > I was discussing this a few months ago on this forum and was basically shot down...
> ...



I see medium format being a little different though, m43 is aimed at a very broad audience and offers a wide range of bodies/lenses to try and maximise this audience, a Canon MF system would likely be aimed much more specifically, you look at Hassleblad, Phase One and Leica and they don't offer anything like the same size of system.

I don't see Canon looking to work directly with any other brand, I'd guess a lot of the reason for producing a MF system in the first place would be linking the brand to ultra high end cameras, If a takeover happened I'd guess we'd see either a total rebranding or staff and facilties put to work creating a new Canon system.

One interesting direction for me would be to take digital medium format mirrorless. In the days of film rangefinders afterall made up a lot more of the MF market than they did the serious 35mm market, I'd guess due to the greater size saving. Besides the price difference I think size is really whats hurting MF today compared to FF DSLR's, my second cousin is a travel photographer just sold off a Hassleblad system in favour of FF DSLR's and size was the main issue for him. Added to that I think the MF market has clearly been targeting rich amateurs for whome size is likely to be an even larger issue.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Aug 13, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> The problem is lenses. Canon would have to come out with another complete line of high end lenses... And that takes time to design and facilities to manufacture... And at the same time as it is trying to update most of it's L-glass and already running into production volume problems.



Wouldn't the company Canon would acquire have it's own line of lenses and manufacturing facilities?

I wonder whether Canon could convert the cameras & lenses to EOS, e.g. mount diameters might be an issue.


----------



## AmbientLight (Aug 13, 2013)

Ellen Schmidtee said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > The problem is lenses. Canon would have to come out with another complete line of high end lenses... And that takes time to design and facilities to manufacture... And at the same time as it is trying to update most of it's L-glass and already running into production volume problems.
> ...



Even though there may be lenses and production facilities available we must expect Canon to bring in its own expertise in both research and development and also in production. This should serve to increase quality and decrease production costs, but it will also seriously change both the product offering and how it is being sold as in how often, how successfully the product is being sold. Just purchasing a company won't be enough, because the purchased company must also be brought in-line with what Canon is doing to realize potential synergies.

The alternative would be to purchase a niche vendor just to acquire market share in that niche, but without any further plans. I don't think Canon would do such a thing just for bragging rights, which is both costly and potentially non-profitable.


----------



## deleteme (Aug 13, 2013)

Phase One: 300 employees
Canon: 198,000 employees

By any measure the MF market barely moves the needle for them. 
For the hobbyist (that wont buy but will talk about them much as the auto enthusiasts declaim loudly about Porsche , Ferrari Lamborghini etc.) the market seems very significant.

Can Canon translate this to meaningful growth for their core brand or will it be a wasteful indulgence on the part of some enthusiasts in the company?


----------



## AmbientLight (Aug 13, 2013)

Normalnorm said:


> Phase One: 300 employees
> Canon: 198,000 employees
> 
> By any measure the MF market barely moves the needle for them.
> ...



Quite frankly I doubt that at Canon what you have described as some enthusiasts are the actual decision makers. In case Canon moves forward and invests in this shrinking market, it is because they see some business potential, possibly based on some information they have internally available, which Canon sees as a reason for this move. We can only guess at what this is. I assume it could be getting their hands on some technology they covet (low probability as I see it) or actually redefining part of the market (high probability as I see it).


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 13, 2013)

I doubt there's any truth in this; at least not in Canon producing MF gear. They are hardly a niche market company. 
MF companies wanting to sell ( out ) would be a completely different kettle of fish though. Larger format companies _are_ concerned about the onward and upward march of the FF sensor. My source ? My partner in Building Panoramics has been UK agent for a well known large format digital since the beginning if digital time.


----------



## Halfrack (Aug 13, 2013)

IF Canon were to get into a MF type situation, the company they should buy isn't Phase One or Hasselblad, it's Dalsa - the company behind the IQ1 and IQ2 sensors. If Canon can control the IP on the sensor technology it would give them a lot of firepower to go against Sony sensors.

http://www.digitaltransitions.com/blog/dt-blog/phase-one-iq260-a-sensor-story


----------



## unfocused (Aug 13, 2013)

One way this would make sense would be if Canon is buying a company for their industrial division – a company that makes cameras for military, law enforcement and surveillance purposes for example.

Surveillance cameras are a growth industry and Canon's technical expertise in low-light sensors might mesh nicely with a company that has an established customer base in the industry. Plus, Canon's established worldwide sales network could give them an edge.

Price isn't as much of an issue, as neither government anti-terrorism contracts nor law enforcement surveillance are all that price sensitive (cameras are cheaper than cops or security guards and they work around the clock). In some cases the price can even be passed on to the offender (think Red Light Cameras). 

We get caught up in thinking that traditional applications like commercial photography are always the driving factor, but Canon has a lot of other interests and markets out there. Surveillance is just one possibility. It could be for their medical division or any of several other industrial applications.


----------



## Jon Gilchrist (Aug 13, 2013)

Perhaps they will purchase the Pentax MF products. That would give them an established product to start with, along with non-European manufacturing. And considering that the Pentax is discontinued, they could probably pick it up for a song.


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Aug 14, 2013)

Too small market for a brand like Canon.
Would bring a big rise of Mojo, but it seems Canon want to satisfy their shareholders, nothing else.
Canon is acting like an old human who is afraid of loosing its money under the bed.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 14, 2013)

alexanderferdinand said:


> but it seems Canon want to satisfy their shareholders, nothing else.



Who else would you suggest they try to satisfy? I trust that you realize that as a publicly held corporation, they have a legal obligation to their shareholders...


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Aug 15, 2013)

Therefore I don't believe Canon goes into such a small segment, not so profitable like selling a ton of bodies with an APS-C sensor in it. I simply don't believe Canon going this way. And I would like to be wrong


----------



## Hannes (Aug 16, 2013)

I've always wondered how much of sensor R&D the MF companies pay upfront, I'm guessing not that much. Maybe if canon was to make their own cmos mf sensor but then why buy a company since they are bound to be producing all the bits needed already


----------



## AmbientLight (Aug 18, 2013)

With overall sales volumes being rather small compared to the sales volumes of Canon or Nikon we must expect R&D expenses of MF companies to be minimalistic. Otherwise MF companies would never make a profit.

This realization may be somewhat frustrating for some to think of, but I do believe this to be a reality. Just think of the higher costs in production caused by a combination of low volumes and the requirement for high quality. Then you add higher cost of sales per item again as they are more expensive and volumes are much lower. This puts MF companies in a position, where to make any kind of profit R&D expenses must be kept small, at least in comparison to corporations like Canon or Nikon.

I fear we can safely assume that for each developer in a MF company you will find at least 10 or perhaps even 100 developers in one of the large companies, so the difference will be staggering. The much smaller MF companies must depend on individual outstanding developers, because individual quality is the only way to overcome advantages in quantity of larger companies. If a large company wants to purchase a MF company, it will likely be for getting these individual developers and certain technologies they will otherwise not get their hands on. Then again even this is riddled with risks as the purchasing company cannot be sure to keep these key developers, because these individuals may not want to work within a large company environment.

If you think about it for a while, this makes the entire purchase scenario rather a remote possibility.


----------



## pedro (Aug 19, 2013)

*some additional news over at NL*
18th We're told (thanks) that nothing will appear in any Canon branded MF range until there are enough items to introduce it as a 'system'. This will include 'Canon designed' [sic.] lenses with a new larger version of the EF mount (tentatively called EF-L) and, as with the EOS-M EF->EF-M adapter, a way to allow them to be used seamlessly as very high quality lenses on the current EF mount.
The lens development is being influenced by the new range of 'Cinema' lenses (I note their prices!)
The aim is a 'show stealing' announcement at Photokina next year, but no details on when any cameras might be offered for sale.
I've seen other related comments (thanks) which emphasise that this is still at a relatively early stage and the business relevance has not been established.
My own thoughts are that with the recent decline in DSLR sales, this might be a tricky one to get a good return on the necessary investment?
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon_medium_format_2ff.html


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Sep 2, 2013)

What is medium format in the digital sense - the old 3x3, the 645, the 6x7 as represented by traditional "120"
brands or something new? Look at the range of sensor sizes in point and shoot cameras, or for than matter
anything smaller than the standard 24x36 "full frame" definition. Canon could make a square sensor that would
be covered by the standard 35mm lens image circle - approximately 32 units on a side and get about a 20%
increase in pixel geography and could most likely be manufactured on the existing production lines - and who 
knows how much larger the image could get and still maintain quality standards by increasing the lens to film
plane distance. At least Canon has the engineers to work that out if the marketing case would stand out. 
I'd rather see Canon expand market share along other lines - a full frame GXX, a digital S rangefinder camera
(maybe all manual and they could trot out their 50's lens line again with new cosmetics), how about a manual
digital camera that would use FD series lenses or other options? It's hard to get too excited about medium format when the existing manufacturers are not doing so well financially and expanding (sort of) into the
"premium" interchangeable lens line like the latest Hasselblad relabeling of the Sony system.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 2, 2013)

My bet is that Canon is just looking to one up themselves by making the next best thing to a full frame camera.
IQ would be unparalleled, and you can't keep making low light improvements to sensor technology forever. Eventually the only way to release a better product will be medium format. As a long term business decision I think it's a natural choice.
10 years ago full frame digital cameras were prohibitively expensive, and now we have the 6D. I can see the same thing happening with medium format.


----------



## 1255 (Sep 2, 2013)

LewisShermer said:


> I want a massive mirror with a huge loud flop and I want to have the old school look down view finder.



love it


----------



## dgatwood (Sep 2, 2013)

IMO, the one key piece they need is a built-in, switchable teleexpander in the body. Then they can introduce the high-end lenses as it becomes practical.


----------



## gmrza (Sep 3, 2013)

Halfrack said:


> IF Canon were to get into a MF type situation, the company they should buy isn't Phase One or Hasselblad, it's Dalsa - the company behind the IQ1 and IQ2 sensors. If Canon can control the IP on the sensor technology it would give them a lot of firepower to go against Sony sensors.
> 
> http://www.digitaltransitions.com/blog/dt-blog/phase-one-iq260-a-sensor-story



This makes more sense, as it appears that most of the MF manufacturers source their sensors either from Dalsa or the former Kodak sensor division now Trusense Imaging. Trusense is owned by private equity investors - they would most likely be interested in turning a buck by selling out. Canon on the other hand could use control of more IP in the area of sensors - Canon would probably be more interested in getting access to and control of more sensor IP, especially technology that can be leveraged in Canon's core imaging business.

We would probably need to view a MF acquisition by Canon through the lens of what the acquisition would bring to Canon's core business.


----------



## Bennymiata (Sep 3, 2013)

Many of you seem to forget that Fuji make the current Hasselblad lenses and I don't think that Canon want to buy out Fujitsu.
However, they could easily get Fujitsu to rebrand MF lenses as Canon?

I can't see any good financial reasons for Canon to go MF as many MF using pros are going FF anyway.


----------



## Kelt0901 (Sep 3, 2013)

[/quote]The Phase one cameras, I believe, use the Mamiya 645 lens mount, and lenses are made by a third party. [/quote]

FYI…. PHASE 1 does use the Mamiya lens mount and all Mamiya lens’s are made by Mamiya. Unless their culture has changed recently, Mamiya make every component in their lens, including the lens blanks, grinding, polishing and coating. I have been a Mamiya user since 1966 and this has always been the case. There is now a business relationship between Mamiya, Phase 1, Leaf and Schneider. I would love to have a MF digital back made by Canon with their current technology.


----------



## TAF (Sep 3, 2013)

pedro said:


> *some additional news over at NL*
> 18th We're told (thanks) that nothing will appear in any Canon branded MF range until there are enough items to introduce it as a 'system'. This will include 'Canon designed' [sic.] lenses with a new larger version of the EF mount (tentatively called EF-L) and, as with the EOS-M EF->EF-M adapter, a way to allow them to be used seamlessly as very high quality lenses on the current EF mount.
> The lens development is being influenced by the new range of 'Cinema' lenses (I note their prices!)
> The aim is a 'show stealing' announcement at Photokina next year, but no details on when any cameras might be offered for sale.
> ...




"EF-L" seems like a terribly choice of name, given the likely confusion with "L" lenses, unless all MF lenses will be "L".

Perhaps "EF-66" would be a better choice, assuming they retain the 6x6 format for the notional MF camera.


----------

