# News Flash: Good news for some, bad news for others



## canonnews (Sep 1, 2018)

> Nokishita has updated their information and included information on the mount. It does indeed appear that the RF mount is a shorter registration than the EF mount, and it requires an adapter to use EF lenses.
> That is sure to please some that want to adapt lenses to the RF mount, and will disappoint others that were hoping for native EF compatibility as we surmised before.
> *From Nokishita;*
> M adapter R was confirmed with “Mount Adapter EF – EOS R”. Three types of mount adapters are available with control ring and drop-in filter.
> The ability to use drop-in filters will certainly make this more than just your regular “dumb” adapter and add useful benefit to using EF lenses on an RF mount.



Continue reading...


----------



## Aussie shooter (Sep 1, 2018)

canonnews said:


> Continue reading...



I don't think it would be a problem. And it still sounds like a 'sexy solution' especially for video but also for stills.


----------



## mppix (Sep 1, 2018)

Stupid Canon


----------



## dkangel (Sep 1, 2018)

Well crap.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 1, 2018)

At least this solution cuts down on the nasty flares, vignetting, and ghosting that can come from filter usage.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 1, 2018)

This is the simple solution, but not my preferred solution.


----------



## SOD (Sep 1, 2018)

Ugh. I thought Canon was gonna kill Sony with this release, but both Canon and Nikon are at a severe disadvantage now. Sony has 60+ native lenses for EF mount. Nikon has 2 or 3, and Canon will have... 5. Yikes.

*NO ONE WANTS TO USE ADAPTERS.*


----------



## mppix (Sep 1, 2018)

To recap: to mount ef on rf, you need an adapter, ef to m, you need another, and for rf to m another yet. I sure hope, this is not the full picture..


----------



## JBSF (Sep 1, 2018)

dkangel said:


> Well crap.


 

Agreed. Sort of. This does leave open the possibility of adapting legacy lenses. I hope the adapter is not ridiculously expensive. I bought the OEM Canon EF to EF-M adapter on eBay for $40 when the whole world hated the original EOS M and stuff was cheap. Don’t see that happening again.


----------



## herion (Sep 1, 2018)

Sorta makes more sense, but the thought of using an adapter never gave me a conniption.


----------



## SOD (Sep 1, 2018)

Adapters are just not fun even if they're free. I'd rather just get new lenses, but if I'm going to do that, Sony has a lot more niches covered with their mirrorless EF lens lineup.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 1, 2018)

SOD said:


> Adapters are just not fun even if they're free. I'd rather just get new lenses, but if I'm going to do that, Sony has a lot more niches covered with their mirrorless EF lens lineup.



What do you mean, Sony EF lenses?

I personally preferred the native EF option, but a lot of people seem to manage fine with adaptors.


----------



## SOD (Sep 1, 2018)

Although, certainly 50/1.2 is a niche that Sony doesn't have. Likewise with 28-70/2.0...

Sony best covers the 90% of niches remaining beyond those two lenses, and Nikon has _nothing_.


----------



## SOD (Sep 1, 2018)

scyrene said:


> What do you mean, Sony EF lenses?
> 
> I personally preferred the native EF option, but a lot of people seem to manage fine with adaptors.


Sorry, Sony FE lenses. There are about ten good ones for every mirrorless lens of Canon and Nikon combined so far. And it will be this way for well into next decade. And yes, I was all about EF compatibility for Canon EOS R cameras. Considering the 300+ lenses that wouldn't require a janky adapter to mount.


----------



## JBSF (Sep 1, 2018)

SOD said:


> Adapters are just not fun even if they're free. I'd rather just get new lenses, but if I'm going to do that, Sony has a lot more niches covered with their mirrorless EF lens lineup.



What is the difference between mounting a lens to a flange on a body and mounting it to a flange on an adapter? I haven’t noticed any difference myself.


----------



## canonnews (Sep 1, 2018)

I think the point to remember is that it appears like it's not just your normal adapter, if it allows drop in filters, the benefit to EF glass is HUGE. you only need one set of small filters for your needs, you don't need them for every lens thread diameter.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Sep 1, 2018)

Just tell me it has dual card slot and eyeAF and I'll forgive you Canon


----------



## SOD (Sep 1, 2018)

bokehmon22 said:


> Just tell me it has dual card slot and eyeAF and I'll forgive you Canon


Fat chance on* either *of those!


----------



## Frodo (Sep 1, 2018)

While in the ideal world, a direct EF mount would be easiest when changing lenses, but this would compromise future lens design. 
I use the adapter for my EF lenses on my M3. I also use my 1.4x converter on my 200/2.8 and 400/5.6. Plus I use the EF extension tube and life size converter on various lenses. They are solid and work well. I have no qualms with an adapter for any new mirrorless. The key issue is the focusing protocol and mechanics. Most EF lenses are not optimised for focusing with mirrorless cameras. I expect that this will be the limitation, not the physical extension.
A smaller flange distance will give Canon more options in lens design.
I'm okay with that.


----------



## Tangent (Sep 1, 2018)

Advantage of EF adapter: wider opening in RF mount. More flexibility for RF lens design. Short term pain, long term gain.

I guess the previous rumor of a 'clever' solution referred to the drop-in capability.


----------



## SOD (Sep 1, 2018)

JBSF said:


> What is the difference between mounting a lens to a flange on a body and mounting it to a flange on an adapter? I haven’t noticed any difference myself.


Inevitably you end up with some lenses which don't require an adapter as well as some which do require an adapter. So you have to mount the adapter to the body and then the lens to the adapter. Then you have to take the lens off, then the adapter off, then mount the next lens (which doesn't require an adapter).

If you never want to buy a new lens ever again, by all means just leave the adapter on the body 100% of the time.


----------



## FurryMan (Sep 1, 2018)

People, seriously, are you really expecting a mirrorless with EF mount? How is that going to work? Isn’t a 5Div with mirror up what you want?


----------



## herion (Sep 1, 2018)

canonnews said:


> I think the point to remember is that it appears like it's not just your normal adapter, if it allows drop in filters, the benefit to EF glass is HUGE. you only need one set of small filters for your needs, you don't need them for every lens thread diameter.



If this is true, then this also opens up the market for B+W, Hoya and other specialty filter makers to make these drop ins. I know I'd love to save money on getting filters across different sizes.


----------



## SOD (Sep 1, 2018)

This is all so janky. People who don't already have Canon or Nikon lenses are just going to buy Sony for their much larger native lens selection.

Never thought I'd be saying_ that_.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 1, 2018)

Not a bad idea, though some lenses require a front threaded filter for weather sealing.


----------



## MikeD (Sep 1, 2018)

I seriously considered an M5 with an adapter because I'm told they work perfect w/an adapter but I really wanted FF. The bottom line is I really want a FF mirrorless and if it performs anything close to my 5DMK4, cannon will get my money and I'll use it with my 5d with my EF glass until the FF mirror-less flagship 1DX comes out. That one must have EF. Live is short, Enjoy!


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 1, 2018)

FurryMan said:


> People, seriously, are you really expecting a mirrorless with EF mount? How is that going to work? Isn’t a 5Div with mirror up what you want?


How is it going to work?

That’s pretty self explanatory, no?


----------



## MikeD (Sep 1, 2018)

Not sure I believe this, I think Canon knows that a new ML FF with EF mount is a kick in the nuts to Nikon so why not continue the EF line?


----------



## dtaylor (Sep 1, 2018)

Oh well...my interest in this just dropped significantly.


----------



## vjlex (Sep 1, 2018)

If true, having to remember to bring the adapter and switch it before attaching each EF lens, is a little disappointing. At the moment, it gives me much less incentive to even think about investing in the RF system anytime soon if ever.


----------



## herion (Sep 1, 2018)

FurryMan said:


> People, seriously, are you really expecting a mirrorless with EF mount? How is that going to work? Isn’t a 5Div with mirror up what you want?



Almost sounds like you could potentially MOUNT an EF lens on an RF body, but it wouldn't focus...


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 1, 2018)

*YES! *

I was concerned that Canon were going to do something stupid and release a mirrorless camera with a kludge mount that, in order to stop the adaptorphobics from having a panic attack, means all new mirrorless lens designs would be these ridiculous things with the lens mount half way up the lens barrel and coffee cups for rear caps. 

It was a dumb idea, and I'm glad it didn't happen 

Now, we wait to see what if any relation the new mount has to the EF-M mount. We still have the question of how can RF lenses be adapted to work on the EOS M bodies. 

Seems like Canon are going to wipe the floor with Nikon. The 28-70 f/2 will bring all the boys to the yard


----------



## nostrovia (Sep 1, 2018)

Wow, I love this solution! So nice to automatically have a CPL in place for all my existing glass.


----------



## herion (Sep 1, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> *YES! *
> 
> I was concerned that Canon were going to do something stupid and release a mirrorless camera with a kludge mount that, in order to stop the adaptorphobics from having a panic attack, means all new mirrorless lens designs would be these ridiculous things with the lens mount half way up the lens barrel and coffee cups for rear caps.
> 
> ...



Now, let's see about the body size... let's not sacrifice the excellent Canon ergonomics... a "thinner" 6DII would be perfect, a "slightly larger" M5/M50 is too small with big glass...


----------



## BRunner (Sep 1, 2018)

I have EOS M wiht EF adapter. It's just dumb tube with contacts transfer, its sturdy and lens are not wobbling on camera. The communication protocol is same for EOS and EOS M. I suppose, Canon will keep the communication protocol for "EOS R" mount too. Canon adapter is the shortest, because of short flange distance of EF mount and many EF lenses with adapter are almost equivalent in length to Sony FE lenses (some are even shorter - old 1.4/35L, 1.2/50L, 1.2/85L). I don't think that Canon needs desperately native lenses as all current EF lenses work great with EOS M via adapter or on latest DSLR in LiveView with Dual Pixel AF.

I hope to that the camera controls would be in size of 5D or 1D. I always struggle with Sony A7x and EOS M rear wheel.


----------



## 1Zach1 (Sep 1, 2018)

I’ve never found it a problem to use the EF->M adaptor, so as long as the body specs are worth it, I don’t think I’d have a problem using this adaptor. Everyone is different though so I’m sure it will be controversial.


----------



## an0nymes (Sep 1, 2018)

From nokishita twitter:
"Correction M adapter R was confirmed by "Mount Adapter Ef-eos R". The Mount Adaptor is released with three kinds of control ring and a drop-in filter. I was able to obtain a large amount of images related to "EOS R", so I will make an article about the information that can be published by noon. "


----------



## jpcanon (Sep 1, 2018)

did i just get canon burned ?

i knew i should have stayed away when the 24-70 2.8 and 6d bodies were literally being blown out this summer. they loooovvveee proving how anything and everything is too good to be true 

i guess that’s my lesson , nice f2 glass , jeez i guess this is how it felt back in 1987 huh 

my canon gear became a lot less impressive ... i should just go back to fucking film


----------



## Go Wild (Sep 1, 2018)

I really don´t see what´s the problem in this...on the other side, I see 2 advantages. 

1st advantage - You can use all your EF glass and IF you want, and only if you want, you can buy RF lenses. 
2nd - The adaptors seem to come with PL filter and ND filter - I see a huge advantage in this, especially using my 500mm F4. Do you know how much it costs a drop in filter for the big lenses?? Also i see a huge advantage for video, especially with the ND adaptor. Only need to know if it is a variable ND or you need to buy ND6/8/16 and so on...I think the Filter industry is trembling with this!!!  

About the adaptor...well, assuming it is not too big, i don´t see a problem. I assume also that being a canon adaptor it will work with no problem and you will not notice any focus problem. 

I use the sigma mc-11 on Sony A7r3 and yes...it´s a pain because it interferes with the normal behaviour camera-lens. By the way, use almost exclusively the Canon 15-35 F4 on it. And yes, for video it´s a reaaall pain!! But if Canon makes an adapter that doesn´t cut in anything of the performance, that gives you all camera beneficts, then i really don´t see a problem. 
I am more concern about the camera itself and the specs....I am praying for Canon to give me a great Still/video camera (like the a7R3) and i will sell the Sony and sitck again 100% in my preferred material....Canon!! So Canon, please!!


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 1, 2018)

Sounds good to me. Happy to adapt lenses I have and buy newer lenses if they are interesting like the rumored 24-70 f2.


----------



## 1Zach1 (Sep 1, 2018)

Wow those pictures Nokishita just posted give me lust.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://nokishita-camera.com


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)




----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

Looks like Bizzaro (EOS R) vs. Superman (5D/6D)


----------



## HAL 9000 Mark II (Sep 1, 2018)

I think it's good news. Holding onto a flange distance designed for SLR and dSLR cameras isn't very future proof. And how would it work with native RF lenses anyway? Would the sensor be moveable to shorten the flange distance? Doesn't make much sense to me and the camera would look just like a big dSLR but with an EVF, then what's the point of making a mirrorless system? Nikon and Canon just have to get through this awkward phase when there are a limited amount of native lenses just like Sony had to do. There's just not getting around it.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)




----------



## mppix (Sep 1, 2018)




----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

Tilty-flippy swivel


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

No mention of IBIS on the spec list, but it's clearly incomplete.

No mention even of FPS at this stage, so there's still a chance IBIS is happening.

- A


----------



## mppix (Sep 1, 2018)

... she ain't pretty


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 1, 2018)

Have you considered that (just like the M and the Rebels + 80D + 7D2) that there is a market for both small bodies and larger bodies?

Think back to when the M was released.... How many of you were jumping up and down screaming that it was the end of EF-S? This is no different..... Canon comes out with an "R" that has a small form factor and some wideish and more compact lenses to go with it.... and the cameras like the 6D, 5D, and 1D series continue on as before.... and in the future, one may see a native EF mount mirrorless. The market is big enough for more than one model


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

Someone's totally going to sue one another over the placement/size of that top display. Looks just like Nikon's.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

FINGER SPACE FOR LARGE LENSES

Finally someone gets it right. I knew Canon would.


----------



## nostrovia (Sep 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Tilty-flippy swivel



Excellent! I know this will cause controversy, but I love these latest leaks.


----------



## bod (Sep 1, 2018)

dkangel said:


> Well crap.



Yes a different solution had seemed to be more likely as the rumour mill of recent times has suggested . I also see this as the simple or obvious mount solution rather than an unusual or "sexy" one.

However I see this as a pragmatic approach by Canon. The new RF mount body and the new RF lenses are at shorter focal lengths and I assume more likely to to benefit from the new mount to create a more compact setup. Certainly I like the faster apertures that these lenses are offering which IMO is “sexy”.

I don’t feel as strongly about adaptors (which don’t have any optical elements in them). Since I own only EF glass it would be permanently attached to the RF body which would then not be significantly thicker than it would have been if the new body had been an EF mount. I also now have the option to add RF lenses to my kit if they are indeed significantly smaller/lighter or not bother if they are not.

What I do care about are the ergonomics of the new body such as the size and depth of the grip and it will be interesting to hear next week where the new body sits in between the M series sizes and the DSLR sizes.


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 1, 2018)

FANTASTIC!


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

There's a pretty unattractive silver tube sticking out for the mount. It's not flush with the black bits behind it.

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 1, 2018)

and people are saying that Canon does not care about compatibility…. yet it takes an LP-E6N battery


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

That is a TINY card cover flap. Probably SD-sized only. Could stack two in there, but it might just be one.

- A


----------



## Adelino (Sep 1, 2018)

jpcanon said:


> did i just get canon burned ?
> 
> i knew i should have stayed away when the 24-70 2.8 and 6d bodies were literally being blown out this summer. they loooovvveee proving how anything and everything is too good to be true
> 
> ...


Be sure you know where the film has been before you do that to it.


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 1, 2018)

So, with 4k, the tilty-flippy screen and a fast compact 35mm f1.8 with *macro* I think the new King of Vlogging cameras may be here.


----------



## mppix (Sep 1, 2018)

*EF* 24-105L IS: 690g & 107mm
*RF* 24-105L IS: 698g & 107mm
Yikes!


----------



## BRunner (Sep 1, 2018)

Sweet, my next camera purchase!


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://nokishita-camera.com



Nokoshita screwed up with this - look at the flash hotshoe, they're not to scale at all.


----------



## mppix (Sep 1, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Have you considered that (just like the M and the Rebels + 80D + 7D2) that there is a market for both small bodies and larger bodies?
> 
> Think back to when the M was released.... How many of you were jumping up and down screaming that it was the end of EF-S? This is no different..... Canon comes out with an "R" that has a small form factor and some wideish and more compact lenses to go with it.... and the cameras like the 6D, 5D, and 1D series continue on as before.... and in the future, one may see a native EF mount mirrorless. The market is big enough for more than one model



True and it is also true that EF-M is the end of EF-S


----------



## mppix (Sep 1, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Nokoshita screwed up with this - look at the flash hotshoe, they're not to scale at all.


Yes, the lenses have the exact same length! (assuming the translation info is correct)


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 1, 2018)

I've adjusted the image so the hotshoes are approximately the same size. Now there may be some perspective issues with the new camera being shorter but not enough to justify the difference in the previous image!


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 1, 2018)

mppix said:


> Yes, the lenses have the exact same length! (assuming the translation info is correct)



Not quite

RF 24-105 = 107mm (698g)
EF 24-105 II = 118mm (795g)


----------



## Jethro (Sep 1, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Nokoshita screwed up with this - look at the flash hotshoe, they're not to scale at all.


I thought it looked too small.

Is it just me or is the silver protuberance behind the lens just strange? Seems like they might have stripped away some of the front body (to save weight or allow more finger grip space?).


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2018)

AF to -6EV is claimed. That's... No. That's crazy.


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 1, 2018)

Jethro said:


> I thought it looked too small.
> 
> Is it just me or is the silver protuberance behind the lens just strange? Seems like they might have stripped away some of the front body (to save weight or allow more finger grip space?).



It's either just a design thing or it's to help with heat dissipation. Or both


----------



## mppix (Sep 1, 2018)

The user interface/button layout look like my old 400D ...
Wasn't bad, but...


----------



## Adelino (Sep 1, 2018)

Minus six EV focusing!!


----------



## jolyonralph (Sep 1, 2018)

mppix said:


> The user interface/button layout look like my old 400D ...
> Wasn't bad, but...



Things have to change for the tilty-flippy


----------



## psolberg (Sep 1, 2018)

Really?....So the Sexy solution described to admin by a "source" was...an adapter... like everybody else. Seriously? I suppose only admin himself knows this person, but defining a standard adapter approach as... sexy is pretty damn weird...

Granted there is no product yet and the curtain hasn't lifted, but if all pans out as described, ...canon would be then supporting 3 mounts, two of which will need a lot of lenses going forward and are relatively immature, plus the legacy EF which I assume will continue to see some action...Compare that to just 2 mounts for Nikon, one F for legacy, plus Z, and one for Sony, who is all in the E. 

That lens division is going to be busy and IMO sony is throwing a party. They dodged a bullet twice this month.


----------



## Jethro (Sep 1, 2018)

Adelino said:


> Minus six EV focusing!!


If its true then, yes - wow! I was one of those really hoping for native EF coupling, but this sort of thing might compensate me.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Sep 1, 2018)

SOD said:


> Fat chance on* either *of those!



The M50 has Eye AF, so its easily possible for that one!


----------



## WillT (Sep 1, 2018)

Mehh Sony looks more appealing at this point. I will wait for the official specs


----------



## dak723 (Sep 1, 2018)

People should be very happy now! The complainers have something to piss and moan about and claim how stupid Canon is - and 90% of them will get the adapter for their EF glass and be perfectly happy.

I still believe a native EF mount mirrorless is still in Canon's future.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Sep 1, 2018)

Jethro said:


> I thought it looked too small.
> 
> Is it just me or is the silver protuberance behind the lens just strange? Seems like they might have stripped away some of the front body (to save weight or allow more finger grip space?).



The EOS M and EOS M2 have a dark silver tube similar to what is on the EOS R, but it's shorter on the M & M2 bodies.


----------



## Jethro (Sep 1, 2018)

psolberg said:


> Really?....So the Sexy solution described to admin by a "source" was...an adapter... like everybody else. Seriously? I suppose only admin himself knows this person, but defining a standard adapter approach as... sexy is pretty damn weird...
> 
> Granted there is no product yet and the curtain hasn't lifted, but if all pans out as described, ...canon would be then supporting 3 mounts, two of which will need a lot of lenses going forward and are relatively immature, plus the legacy EF which I assume will continue to see some action...Compare that to just 2 mounts for Nikon, one F for legacy, plus Z, and one for Sony, who is all in the E.
> 
> That lens division is going to be busy and IMO sony is throwing a party. They dodged a bullet twice this month.


Or Canon think they can sell enough of the new mount to justify parallel lens development going forward. I guess this is saying that they do. It is probably also saying that they see the DSLR and mirrorless options as having a (at least a medium term) future cohabiting. The full specs are going to be interesting as to where this sits between the 6D2 and the 5D4. It seems like it is going to have its own space - video?


----------



## scyrene (Sep 1, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> *YES! *
> 
> I was concerned that Canon were going to do something stupid and release a mirrorless camera with a kludge mount that, in order to stop the adaptorphobics from having a panic attack



I'm not an adaptophobic, but using a 500mm lens handheld means a tiny body is not workable for me. So unless they bring out a larger mirrorless body or somehow shave the size of he superteles significantly (without massively inflating the price!), I'll stick with DSLRs (no problem so long as they keep making them!).

(This is just my personal position, I'm sure they know what they're doing).


----------



## scyrene (Sep 1, 2018)

mppix said:


> View attachment 180019
> 
> View attachment 180020
> 
> ...



Just looks like a camera to me. What were you hoping for?


----------



## blackcat (Sep 1, 2018)

canonnews said:


> Continue reading...


Why can't Canon just modify a current DSLR body by taking the mirror out and using the space for the extra electronic features that mirrorless has? I am sure that there are people like me who actually like the size of current Canon DSLR cameras and don't need or want the more compact size of mirrorless cameras. I'd be happy with a camera body the size of my current 5DIV body with all the bells and whistles of a mirrorless camera as well as being able to use all my EF lenses without any mount adapter.


----------



## psolberg (Sep 1, 2018)

Jethro said:


> Or Canon think they can sell enough of the new mount to justify parallel lens development going forward. I guess this is saying that they do. It is probably also saying that they see the DSLR and mirrorless options as having a (at least a medium term) future cohabiting. The full specs are going to be interesting as to where this sits between the 6D2 and the 5D4. It seems like it is going to have its own space - video?



Everybody in the business does parallel development. That's not the problem. It is capacity for production and design that is the bottleneck. You're still splitting your efforts either way the more mounts you have to serve. The more mounts you produce lenses, the less resources you have for each. Off course adapters help, but if you hope to catch up with Sony and their native lineup, it is beyond question that doing so with one mount is easier than two. Off course they will increase capacity, but so is everybody doing for sure. I'd bet if Nikon didn't have plans to drop in an APS-C camera, they do now, because that could use all the Z-mount FF glass without adapters on a Z-mounted APS-C, just like in current DSLRs, and lightweight APS-C glass in "crop mode" without adapter. So where does this leave EF-M people? Off course canon could slap an APS-C sensor on the R mount and do the same...and give the middle finger to every EF-M owner in the process


----------



## scyrene (Sep 1, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> I've adjusted the image so the hotshoes are approximately the same size. Now there may be some perspective issues with the new camera being shorter but not enough to justify the difference in the previous image!
> 
> 
> View attachment 180022



Not quite so bad. Nice deep grip anyhow.


----------



## psolberg (Sep 1, 2018)

blackcat said:


> Why can't Canon just modify a current DSLR body by taking the mirror out and using the space for the extra electronic features that mirrorless has? I am sure that there are people like me who actually like the size of current Canon DSLR cameras and don't need or want the more compact size of mirrorless cameras. I'd be happy with my current 5DIV body with all the bells and whistles of a mirrorless camera as well as being able to use all my EF lenses without any mount adapter.



They can. They (allegedly) won't. They don't need to use the space for anything electronic. Such idea works and could still happen in theory. There is a youtube video that shows you how to make your DSLR mirrorless (I don't advise you follow its advise). I saw some people theorycrafting there would be protruded elements like with some of the video lenses out there. TBH that sounded clunky as hell and outright horrible, but yes, it was physically possible, thus not impossible. It would have off course restricted further the size of any said rear elements as they had to clear the EF electrical contacts, plus allow some room for the rear housing to hold the glass, and hence complicated matters for lenses requiring big rear elements.


----------



## rwvaughn (Sep 1, 2018)

scyrene said:


> I'm not an adaptophobic, but using a 500mm lens handheld means a tiny body is not workable for me. So unless they bring out a larger mirrorless body or somehow shave the size of he superteles significantly (without massively inflating the price!), I'll stick with DSLRs (no problem so long as they keep making them!).
> 
> (This is just my personal position, I'm sure they know what they're doing).



"Smaller and lighter" has always been a dubious selling point for mirrorless camera gear. The simple truth is that the laws of physics are constant. Smaller, lighter telephoto lenses are a pipe dream and the laws of physics can't be bent. There is a reason that the Hubble Space Telescope is the size of a school bus and weighs over 24000 pounds.


----------



## Ditboy (Sep 1, 2018)

SOD said:


> Ugh. I thought Canon was gonna kill Sony with this release, but both Canon and Nikon are at a severe disadvantage now. Sony has 60+ native lenses for EF mount. Nikon has 2 or 3, and Canon will have... 5. Yikes.
> 
> *NO ONE WANTS TO USE ADAPTERS.*


Why? If they have full functions and drop in filter, why not? I have several M5's and have used EF adaptors, FD to EF-M adaptors, Leica screw mount to EF-M, Olympus OM to EF-M and have a slew of native lenses. No biggie...


----------



## psolberg (Sep 1, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> Why? If they have full functions and drop in filter, why not? I have several M5's and have used EF adaptors, FD to EF-M adaptors, Leica screw mount to EF-M, Olympus OM to EF-M and have a slew of native lenses. No biggie...



the filter is a diminishing returns approach overtime and not the permanent advantage here. Every native lens can't use it so it is already becoming less relevant. It is a clever idea, and a slight differentiator. But it will not change much in the end and best of all, it is so simple to copy that it just not that strategically important. I'd expect every 3rd party adapter out there to toss such feature there for sony adapters before the year ends. probably for Nikon too once they reverse engineer the electrical protocol. it is a good day to be in the adapter business for sure.

There is also a problem with the new mount: Pro APS-C. If you put a pro-cropped ala 7D it on the R mount, you screw EF-M buyers who own glass there as you cannot adapt EF-M glass either because of the flange distance. If you put it on EF-M, then you cannot mount R glass there (unless a 2mm adapter is made). I imagine sony/Nikon are going to drop a pro aps-c body in their lineups. And it will be 100% compatible with native FF lenses with no adapter and 100% compatible with FF sensors in crop mode without adapters.


----------



## weixing (Sep 1, 2018)

psolberg said:


> the filter is a diminishing returns approach overtime and not the permanent advantage here. Every native lens can't use it so it is already becoming less relevant. It is a clever idea, and a slight differentiator. But it will not change much in the end and best of all, it is so simple to copy that it just not that strategically important. I'd expect every 3rd party adapter out there to toss such feature there for sony adapters before the year ends. probably for Nikon too once they reverse engineer the electrical protocol. it is a good day to be in the adapter business for sure.
> 
> There is also a problem with the new mount: Pro APS-C. If you put a pro-cropped ala 7D it on the R mount, you screw EF-M buyers who own glass there as you cannot adapt EF-M glass either because of the flange distance. If you put it on EF-M, then you cannot mount R glass there (unless a 2mm adapter is made). I imagine sony/Nikon are going to drop a pro aps-c body in their lineups. And it will be 100% compatible with native FF lenses with no adapter and 100% compatible with FF sensors in crop mode without adapters.


Hi,
I don't see a problem since current EF-M lens also cannot mount on EF mount DSLR. The EF-M mirrorless is target for those who want a very small package... small camera and small lens while the RF mount is a mirrorless replacement for EF mount... basically a shorter flange EF mount.

Anyway, I think if Canon come out with a mirrorless 7D replacement, it'll be RF mount and not EF-M mount.

Have a nice day.


----------



## crashpc (Sep 1, 2018)

I still cannot make anything from this, but EOS R would have that 35mm glued on it all the time, for compact setup. For special occasions something 16mm wide and 50-80mm, and that's it. Crop for reach....


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Sep 1, 2018)

What I would really like: Make the adapters very cheap (like $50), so that we can buy a bunch of them and attach them to all EF lenses we take on our photo trip! Usually that will not be more than four lenses. There could also be a screw to attach the adapter to a lens even more firmly. 

The need for an adapter is a systematic problem that Canon caused by changing the mount. So it would only be fair if they at least do not make money with those adapters and just sell them for the production price. 

Not like cellphone makers who decided to put non-removable batteries into the cellphones and then charge a huge amount of money for changing the battery although it is a problem that THEY caused.

I would even like to see at least one adapter included in the box if you buy that $2000 camera. That is not too much to ask for.


----------



## GaryJ (Sep 1, 2018)

Does this open the possibility of third-party lenses and adapters , if it had been the "clever" adapter that would have closed that avenue wouldn't it?


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Sep 1, 2018)

SOD said:


> Adapters are just not fun even if they're free. I'd rather just get new lenses, but if I'm going to do that, Sony has a lot more niches covered with their mirrorless EF lens lineup.


What about thinking the other way around?
If one is in need to use some of the EF lenses until there are RF equivalents available then one can "clue" an EF to RF adapter on each of this EF lenses. At least with the two or three most used EF lenses this could be a temporarily solution.


----------



## Yasko (Sep 1, 2018)

jpcanon said:


> did i just get canon burned ?
> 
> i knew i should have stayed away when the 24-70 2.8 and 6d bodies were literally being blown out this summer. they loooovvveee proving how anything and everything is too good to be true
> 
> ...



The gear you bought is still fantastic... and usable! There was no way to use your FX Lenses in 1987 on modern bodies...
And EF lenses can be used on both DSLRs and Mirrorless Canon cameras.

Btw, the fact that they are still releasing EF lenses tells me that they are not dead but more targeted towards Pro photographers (especially long focal length), filter adapters support this.


----------



## bergstrom (Sep 1, 2018)

should we just boycott thjis release and send a message to canon, ef mount please, we'll wait for the next one?


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 1, 2018)

I want to see a 1.4x Teleconverter adapter for EF to R. No need for two adapters when using a teleconverter.


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Sep 1, 2018)

DOA for me. I was hoping for an EF mount MILC so Canon can leverage their existing lens lineup.


----------



## michi (Sep 1, 2018)

I don't really see the issue. It's basically an extension tube with with data pass-through. If you have a lot of EF glass, you will probably always leave the adapter on the camera.

The statement makes it sound like there will be three versions? One plain, one with a drop-in-filter option and one with a control ring. One would hope that at least the basic adapter will be cheap.

If mirrorless ends up being the future, I think this is a good point to introduce the new mount and build from there.

Personally, I'm happy as can be with my 5DIV and tons of EF lenses. I will patiently see how this all pans out in the next few years. Maybe I'll consider the "RII" or "RIII".


----------



## efmshark (Sep 1, 2018)

I am amazed by the number of people who don't understand basic optics and physics. If Canon were to introduce a mirrorless camera with native EF mount, they would have to give up on nearly all potential advantages of a mirrorless solution. Reduced flange distance is what makes it possible to manufacture smaller cameras and smaller, simpler lenses.

If you want a Canon mirrorless with native EF mount, you can get the EOS R and leave the EF adapter on all the time and simply use any and all of your EF lenses.


----------



## efmshark (Sep 1, 2018)

scyrene said:


> I'm not an adaptophobic, but using a 500mm lens handheld means a tiny body is not workable for me. So unless they bring out a larger mirrorless body or somehow shave the size of he superteles significantly (without massively inflating the price!), I'll stick with DSLRs (no problem so long as they keep making them!).
> 
> (This is just my personal position, I'm sure they know what they're doing).



When you use a 500mm lens, the lens holds the camera body, not the other way around. So you're mostly holding and balancing the lens, smaller camera body doesn't make it any more difficult.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 1, 2018)

efmshark said:


> When you use a 500mm lens, the lens holds the camera body, not the other way around. So you're mostly holding and balancing the lens, smaller camera body doesn't make it any more difficult.



Well admittedly I haven't tried mounting it on a body like this (I tried the original EOS-M but that didn't have a grip), but I have never had the 500L on the 5-series bodies and thought 'I really wish the body was smaller'. It just works, and works fine. So I am very cautious about making a change for the sake of it. Many people use the superteles on tripods, so they will likely have no problem.


----------



## TAF (Sep 1, 2018)

Gee, we were promised a 'sexy' solution and they give us...an adapter.

Although the PL adapter does sound sort of useful, since it would obviate the need to ever again buy a polarizing filter (which is a long term savings). Ditto ND, and other filters. Maybe that really is a long term benefit. I'm coming around to thinking that it is, if they really can hold the front and rear mounts parallel.

So I'm going to reserve judgement until there are some reviews that pixel peep to demonstrate just how good a job Canon does in keeping the front and rear faces parallel. That really is the critical factor.

The real demonstration will be the high megapixel body that is sure to follow. If they stick with the new mount, then they are convinced that they can reliably maintain that registration. If the high megapixel body is EF native, then that would send a message as well.

I look forward to holding one. Ergonomics are the key deciding factor for me. If that grip is comfortable, and the controls fall readily to hand, I'm in for one.

(and being able to adapt my FD lens, as well as my antique large format lenses with minimal effort, is very cool)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2018)

efmshark said:


> I am amazed by the number of people who don't understand basic optics and physics. If Canon were to introduce a mirrorless camera with native EF mount, they would have to give up on nearly all potential advantages of a mirrorless solution. Reduced flange distance is what makes it possible to manufacture smaller cameras and smaller, simpler lenses.


Indeed. People who understand basic optics and physics realize that the benefits of a shorter flange distance apply only to a limited subset of lens designs.


----------



## stefang (Sep 1, 2018)

An adapter with control ring sounds promising! It would be nice to assign ISO to it...


----------

