# Canon to announce medium format dslr?



## Louis (Aug 6, 2012)

Whoooa!!


http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/05/canon-medium-format-dslr-and-sony-nex-6-both-coming-next-month/

"There are some interesting murmurings in the world of camera rumors. Photokina is just around the corner, and if the rumors are to be believed, we’ll be seeing some pretty earth-shattering unveilings at the German trade show.

CanonWatch recently received information about an upcoming medium format DSLR by Canon, to be announced at Photokina.

The camera will reportedly offer an EF mount, but may not be compatible with the entire lineup of EF lenses:

[...] newer EF lenses will be supported and (older) lenses with popular focal lengths that actually are suited for full frame sensors will see new editions for the medium format camera (possibly in Spring 2013). Since an EF mount accepts all EF lenses, the only way I can figure out you can block certain EF lenses from being used is through electronic sensing (my speculation). It is not known if the medium format DSLR will have a mechanical interlock for EF-S lenses (though I think this is more than plausible).

It would certainly be an interesting move by Canon. Just months after announcing a cinema DSLR to compete against the likes of RED, Canon would be diving headfirst into a market occupied by the likes of Pentax and Hasselblad.

On a slightly less earth-shattering note, SonyAlphaRumors is reporting with certainty that Sony has a NEX-6 camera prepped and ready for launch.

The camera would be a smaller counterpart to the enormously popular NEX-7 — a top-seller amongst mirrorless cameras. They write,

[...] this will be a sort of “mini-NEX-7″. It has an integrated viewfinder like the NEX-7 but with a tiny bit lower EVF resolution. The camera will be cheaper than the NEX-7 and price right in the middle between the NEX-5F (also coming in September) and the current NEX-7.

Get ready: we might be in for a boatload of exciting announcements come next month.



Looks like we have allot to look forward too, 

anyone see this coming?


----------



## dr croubie (Aug 6, 2012)

I think I (roughly) worked out in a post a few months back, that there's not much more room in the 44.00mm between the lens and sensor for a bigger mirror (currently 24mm for FF). Maybe it could go to 45x30mm with some squeezing, almost competing with the Leica S2 in sensor size (hopefully not in the same price ballpark), but I doubt we'll see much higher.

Unless.

And this is a big hope.

Get rid of the mirror.

Medium Format Digital Rangefinder.

(or it doesn't even have to be rangefinder, just mirrorless with Hybrid AF Sensor like EOS-M and 650D).
Like a Digital Mamiya 7 with Live-View.
I really really doubt it.
But I really really want it to happen, i'd be preordering.

As for image circle coverage, if it's FF or bigger, then EF-S lenseswill probably be precluded just as they are for normal FF. Some EF lenses have a bigger image-circle than needed for an FF sensor, like the TS-E range (by design), the 8-15mm Fisheye (at the 'longer' lengths at least), probably others (like the longer telephotos, anything with the least vignetting on FF).
Or maybe they could cough up to Nikon and pay the patent-money for Digital Cropping with smaller image circles (like using DX lenses on FX bodies).

Still, I doubt it.
But it's the only way you're getting an MF out of Canon, and definitely the only way you're getting EF lenses on any MF body (Hartblei H-Cam excepted).


As for the NEX-6.
wtf?
"The camera would be a smaller counterpart to the enormously popular NEX-7"
You can get smaller than a NEX-7? It already looks like a pack of cards on a beercan, why make it a matchbox?


----------



## keithcooper (Aug 6, 2012)

A rework of the CanonWarch stuff, which is one of the more vague 'MF' reports for a while.

Ignores the flange distance of the EF mount and any required mirror (Canon MF mirrorless is just a bit too way out - this is Canon we're talking about)

It also misses out the fact that even lenses with larger than needed image circles tend to have internal baffles to restrict the areas covered to a 35mm sensor size (cue square sensor discussions)

I've been following this particular meandering thread since 2006 at:
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon_medium_format_2ff.html] [url]http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon_medium_format_2ff.html[/url]


----------



## pakosouthpark (Aug 6, 2012)

hmm i doubt it.. why now? hasselblad have done this for a long time and canon never did anything about it..

i think someone is mistaking medium format with bigger MP resolution rumours..


----------



## nicku (Aug 6, 2012)

pakosouthpark said:


> hmm i doubt it.. why now? hasselblad have done this for a long time and canon never did anything about it..



Because Hasselblad is just too expensive.... and the lenses are way too expensive. A medium format Canon that accepts more cheap EF lenses is a wise marketing move. Many pros that currently use FF bodies will be tempted to pay say 10k for a MF body and able to use a big part of existing EF lenses in their arsenal.

I don't say that a MF Canon body will certainly appear... i only say that it's make sense.


----------



## pakosouthpark (Aug 6, 2012)

nicku said:


> pakosouthpark said:
> 
> 
> > hmm i doubt it.. why now? hasselblad have done this for a long time and canon never did anything about it..
> ...



they could have done it 2 years ago..


----------



## Hillsilly (Aug 6, 2012)

An EF mount? Unlikely - Unless current EF lenses work in a "crop mode". But this wouldn't be that bad. Its an extra functionality.

EF Compatability? Not a problem at all. As long as the flange distance is significantly longer than 44mm, then you'd just need an adapter when using the medium format lenses with a DSLR or mirrorless camera. 

I've just read a few reviews of the Nex-7. Am I the only one wondering why Canon didn't use it as the template for designing the EOS-M?


----------



## Ricku (Aug 6, 2012)

I want one! But only if it is no bigger / heavier than a 5D2.

Not gonna happen. ;D


----------



## Canon-F1 (Aug 6, 2012)

Hillsilly said:


> An EF mount? Unlikely - Unless current EF lenses work in a "crop mode". But this wouldn't be that bad. Its an extra functionality.



yep that´s my idea too.
like the nikon DX crop mode.

that would be nice.
im to lazy to check and do the math right now.. but how many MP would a usual MF sensor have when the FF crop mode is around 22MP?

i think it´s 44 MP for a MF then..right?

so could the rumored 40+ MP canon camera be a medium format camera?
using the same sensor tech as the current 5D MK3 but with a twice as large sensor?


----------



## RMuzzy (Aug 6, 2012)

Canon could do this using existing lenses by incorporating a high quality optical adapter into the camera design, similar to that in Hasselblad's PC-mutar. This would increase the coverage and focal length of any lens, however it would mean less light reaches any given part of the sensor.


----------



## Caps18 (Aug 6, 2012)

But would the TS-E's work without the adapter? It would fit into the timeline of them coming out with the new 45mm & 90mm TS-E, doesn't it?

They would need to come out with a new 50mm f/1.2 and 85mm f/1.2 (unless the existing ones can work without a lens adapter. I think the people interested in buying this camera would be able to afford a new lens to get the best performance possible.


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Aug 6, 2012)

I'd be rather surprised to see Canon go to medium format, especially considering how the 5DIII already is significantly superior to medium format film and has eaten that part of the market alive.

If they do, I would expect it to be something akin to the Cinema line and a clean break with the EOS line. And priced accordingly.

The bit about the original source of this rumor mistraking marketing speak for "medium format quality in an EOS body" as "a medium format body with an EOS mount" by far makes the most sense to me.

Cheers,

b&


----------



## preppyak (Aug 6, 2012)

I just can't imagine this all coming together in non-EF format. So they'd have production lines running to get all their EF-M stuff out (due in October), not to mention maybe a pro system. They also have to produce all of their current lineup (T3, T2i/T3i/T4i, 60D or replacement, 7D, 5DII or replacement, 5dIII, and the 1DX)...plus a whole new line of cinema cameras that they've yet to deliver (with new lenses for that as well)...plus a few lenses they announced a year ago that aren't out yet, and others that have no stock.

Where would they possibly have room for a whole other camera system, especially one that might abandon the EF mount, or would be a major departure from their normal path? I can see a 40mp EF camera, no doubt...but not a whole new system.


----------



## Stone (Aug 6, 2012)

I find it highly unlikely unless an entire new suite of lenses were being released. I wouldn't trust any EF lenses mounted to a MF sensor and I don't think people buying this type of camera would either, just doesn't make sense. I agree this is probably the high MP body and it will be _advertised _as having MF resolution, not much different from the spin on the D800.

Canon just doesn't seem that aggressive to me, look how safe they played it with their mirrorless camera. Now, I for one would welcome a Canon MF mirrorless, it wouldn't need to shoot at a fast fps rate (none of the MF bodies do) it would simply need to be a no holds barred IQ/resolution monster in a reasonably compact package. That would shake things up in this industry unlike anything seen in recent years. Honestly, I don't see it happening, but my candle is still lit for a FF mirrorless from Canon, they _might _have the stones to give that a try but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## Stone (Aug 6, 2012)

Freelancer said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > Where would they possibly have room for a whole other camera system, especially one that might abandon the EF mount, or would be a major departure from their normal path? I can see a 40mp EF camera, no doubt...but not a whole new system.
> ...



The EOS cinema line was produced because of the tremendous success Canon enjoyed in the VDSLR market, they have plenty of sales and market research to justify the investment into EOS Cinema and it cost them relatively little to add video to their EOS bodies to test that theory. MF is still very much a small niche and there's no evidence that people would be willing to upgrade to a far more expensive camera/lens system, enthusiasts like us aside. Expanding production capacity is not trivial, we're talking hundreds of millions of dollars and Canon just ain't that bold, they would need solid proof that they could turn a decent profit so someone will need to do it first. 

I'd love to see a more affordable MF body myself, but this is Canon we're talking about here.


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Aug 6, 2012)

I see lots of people hypothesizing and / or wishing for medium format mirrorless with an EF mount.

Frankly, I really, really don't see that happening.

At absolute most, it'll be like the EOS M, where you can use an adapter to mount EF lenses.

But, really...there's no point. Maybe you could use the TS-E lenses without using the movements, but everything else is going to have an image circle that just barely covers the 135 format. That especially includes each and every lens with less-than-stellar corner performance...which is just about every lens one might think one might want to use with medium format.

No, medium format, mirrorless or otherwise, will come with a new mount and new lenses. It simply has to; physics (geometry!) demands as much -- which is exactly why it ain't gonna happen.

Cheers,

b&


----------



## preppyak (Aug 6, 2012)

Freelancer said:


> it´s all nice and true what you say but i know more people with a medium format camera then with a 15000$ video camera + 43000$ lenses (like the canon CN-E 14.5-60mm).


That's because most of the people working in that realm rent rather than buy. They factor that into their prices. You'd have to know someone with a production suite to know someone who owns the C300 or RED cameras personally. This is especially true because a normal video production involves multiple people and a lot more money; whereas someone in photography can, theoretically, do their work on their own.

I just don't get the excitement for Canon medium format. It probably can't use your existing EF lenses, so, you are already not forced into a specific system. And I can't imagine it not being $10k+, as the Canon niche products have come out as expensive, if not more expensive than their counterparts (the C300 is way overpriced, the 1D-C costs 50% more than Sony's F700, and the C500 is comparable in price with a RED system). So if you're willing to spend $10k+ on a MF system, why not do it already with the options that exist?

And again, the Canon Cine stuff was announced in April; yet doesn't exist right now. You can't pre-order it, and even the pricing wasn't definitive at the time of the announcement. There's not even a release date for them to push back 3 months. So you might see this thing in 2013, but at the same price as what exists today...


----------



## wockawocka (Aug 6, 2012)

Hmmm, how about a Canon Medium format system with a removable back and adaptor for Hasselblad bodies which consists of 2 x 1Dx sensors.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Aug 6, 2012)

TrumpetPower! said:


> I see lots of people hypothesizing and / or wishing for medium format mirrorless with an EF mount.
> 
> Frankly, I really, really don't see that happening.
> 
> ...



I think it's the other way around - EOS M proved that the mount is the electronics, and no more.

Therefore, if Canon makes medium format cameras, why not do the same? Keep the contacts, keep the protocols, increase the flange distance for the MF camera, and allow the MF lenses to be mounted on FF / APS-C / EOS M cameras via an adapter that compensates for the smaller-sensor-body's shorter flange distance.


----------



## Lawliet (Aug 6, 2012)

Freelancer said:


> [
> EF stands for electronic focus if im not wrong.



E: electronic aperture
F: autofocus
TS: tilt/shift
Build your own lens designation 

Build your own is also to be considered with MF - modularity is much more widespread, at the same time most Canon gear would have noticeable caveats, from the image circle of the lenses to the flash duration of the Speedlites. Would a Canon MF offer me anything past having the same label on the gear? "Me too" isn't much of a sales point to me. OTOH building a 135 that behaves more like MF would have benefits...


----------



## The Bad Duck (Aug 6, 2012)

It does sound unlikely. Why on earth would anyone use a crop mode on a MF camera? You get a MF camera because of sensor size then why not use it? Does not make sense. However, if FF is considered "full" and aps-c is considered "small" then medium format might be aps-h? But then again, why keep that format around anyways? Better to develop less sensors and do them better as competition on sensors are harder than ever. No. If I would spend money on a MF cam I would also spend money on one or two great lenses built for it instead of cripling it with croped lenses.


----------



## wockawocka (Aug 6, 2012)

The Bad Duck said:


> It does sound unlikely. Why on earth would anyone use a crop mode on a MF camera? You get a MF camera because of sensor size then why not use it? Does not make sense. However, if FF is considered "full" and aps-c is considered "small" then medium format might be aps-h? But then again, why keep that format around anyways? Better to develop less sensors and do them better as competition on sensors are harder than ever. No. If I would spend money on a MF cam I would also spend money on one or two great lenses built for it instead of cripling it with croped lenses.



Well it's not as crazy as it sounds.

For studio work I use two lenses, on the H3dII-39 I use a 100mm 2.2 with a 1.7x TC, I also have an 80, which I don't use and a 35mm for landscapes.

My canon kit though has 10 lenses.

So a MF body with an EF mount would be cool. I could buy the body, then expand my lenses. a bit like how you can fit a EF lens to a crop body. It doesn't use all the lens but you get used to the L glass.

But if you can remove the back and send it to a Haselblad / Mamiya or Phase body Canon will sell them by the bucketload. In fact, I'd go so far as to say they'd dominate the market in less than 12 months.

The only thing Hasselblad's H3D body and sensor has over the 1DX is 39mp, 16 bit files, no AA filter, and Hasselblad glass.

But my max useable ISO is 200.

Imagine what it would do to the MF market.


----------



## dhofmann (Aug 6, 2012)

One strategy to allow EF lenses on a medium format body despite the smaller image circle is to apply vignetting correction in firmware, provided the vignetting isn't too severe.

Increasing the flange distance to accommodate a larger mirror will lose infinity focus on some lenses, but maybe Canon has designed this problem out of their new lenses. So this might be an alternative to a mirrorless medium format body.

And of course, an adapter with glass can fix both problems, but the results may not be pretty.


----------



## wockawocka (Aug 6, 2012)

A lot of my L glass goes past infinity.


----------



## art_d (Aug 6, 2012)

TrumpetPower! said:


> But, really...there's no point. Maybe you could use the TS-E lenses without using the movements, but everything else is going to have an image circle that just barely covers the 135 format.


Actually it's been known for some time that Canon's newer TS-E lenses can be used on medium format sensors with movements.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/hartblei-cam.shtml

I would be interested in a Canon EF-mount medium format even if the only lenses that worked on it were TS-E lenses, and even if it was a live-view only camera. I think there are a lot of architecture and landscape photographers like myself who would be very interested in this as an option. A really nice alternative over going with something like a Phase One back with a technical camera setup. But, the problem in my view is that Canon would need to add a couple more TS-E lenses into their lineup. 

The 24mm is just about perfect for architecture in most circumstances, and 17mm is really nice but useful mostly in a few specialized circumstances because of how ultrwide angle can exaggerate the viewpoint. Say theoretically Canon comes out with a typical "small" MF sensor that's 33x44mm....a 24mm lens would become equivalent to 19mm on a FF DSLR. And 17mm would be like 13mm. That's great for ultrawide fanatics, but not so great for more typical commercial photos. There are rumors of updated 45mm and 90mm TS-Es, which would be great, but a 45mm on the MF would be like 35mm on FF. To get to that 24-28mm range which is in my opinion the classical "sweet spot" for standard wide angle, they'd need to also come out with a 30-35mm TS-E.


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 6, 2012)

Would be nice to be able to shoot at 12800 ISO without noise ;D

I'm in


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Aug 6, 2012)

dhofmann said:


> One strategy to allow EF lenses on a medium format body despite the smaller image circle is to apply vignetting correction in firmware, provided the vignetting isn't too severe.



It's not just a matter of a couple stops of darkening plus a bit of loss of contrast / resolution.

It's complete darkness, as dark as with a lens cap.

I can't be arsed to look for examples, but the new fisheye zoom at its smallest focal length is what it looks like.



> Increasing the flange distance to accommodate a larger mirror will lose infinity focus on some lenses, but maybe Canon has designed this problem out of their new lenses. So this might be an alternative to a mirrorless medium format body.
> 
> And of course, an adapter with glass can fix both problems, but the results may not be pretty.



The whole point of medium format is image quality. Suggest to somebody about to blow five figures on a medium format kit that you can kludge together an adapter that'll let you turn a 135 format lens into a coke bottle and they'll ask you what kind of crack you've been smoking.

There really, truly isn't any advantage at all to be had by mounting a 135 format lens to a medium format body (with the exception of some bizarre specialist rigs), even in a crop mode.

If you can afford a medium format body and you've got a bunch of 135 format lenses, you've already got multiple 135 format bodies. So why on Earth would you want to stick one of those lenses on the medium format body any more than somebody who today shoots a 5DIII / 1DX / D800 would want to mount an EF-S lens?

Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Cheers,

b&


----------



## Tayvin (Aug 6, 2012)

This rumor has been around forever. I don't see Canon benefitting from the MF market. Their main target is photo enthusiasts and they make a fortune doing just that. Hassy will make a 35mm camera before Canon gets into MF. 35mm is what sells.


----------



## Portrait_Moments_Photogra (Aug 6, 2012)

all i can say is -

you will be AMAZED how many medium format cameras got sold to "Non Photography Professionals"

- think of it this way - are those who bought Lambos, Ferraris, Vipers, Corvettes - race car drivers?


- Im not going to hold my breath if canon makes MF or not - i got my share of MF cameras and digital backs.

but to say one camera manufacturer over the other will not make one camera system over the other system...
try asking surgeons, lawyers and high end professionals who are into photography - most of them got one 

... because they can.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Aug 6, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> Would be nice to be able to shoot at 12800 ISO without noise ;D
> 
> I'm in



there are noise even at 100 iso, so you probably have no chance to see a camera produce an image without noise unless it is a camera making by aliens...


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 7, 2012)

ishdakuteb said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Would be nice to be able to shoot at 12800 ISO without noise ;D
> ...



Will be alot of green dot instead ;D ;D ;D

A simle wish I have for Canon is FF mirrorless body, that didn't happen. AND NOW MF body coming soon???? u guys funny


----------



## Hillsilly (Aug 7, 2012)

Portrait_Moments_Photogra said:


> all i can say is -
> 
> you will be AMAZED how many medium format cameras got sold to "Non Photography Professionals"



You're right. I'm one of them. I've been playing around with Mamiya medium format cameras since the mid 90's. Yet I've never sold a photo or made any money professionally. I just like taking photos and until recently medium format film has been the optimal choice for me (I lack the interest and patience of 8x10 or bigger.) But I think there's a difference between spending a few thousand on a camera versus tens of thousands. 

My 2c, if they make an excellent camera and keep the cost of a reasonable system (body and a couple of lenses) under $10k, there will be a lot of interest. Over that price, they'll quickly lose a lot of enthusiasm. Those that are left are probably already looking at Hasselblads. Probably the Ferrari edition to match their car.


----------



## Neeneko (Aug 7, 2012)

I am rather surprised so many people are commenting about how 'silly' the idea of putting an EF lens on a MF camera is.....

I see people using Nikon FF lenses on MF view cameras fairly regularly....


----------



## dr croubie (Aug 7, 2012)

Hillsilly said:


> You're right. I'm one of them. I've been playing around with Mamiya medium format cameras since the mid 90's. Yet I've never sold a photo or made any money professionally. I just like taking photos and until recently medium format film has been the optimal choice for me (I lack the interest and patience of 8x10 or bigger.) But I think there's a difference between spending a few thousand on a camera versus tens of thousands.



Me too. Click my sig for (half of) the MF lenses I own (since I took the photo i've bought an(other) P6, a Kiev60, an(other) Zodiak 30mm fisheye, an(other) MC Flek 50/4, an MC Volna 80/2.8, an MC Biometar 120/2.8, an(other) MC Sonnar 180/2.8, an MC Sonnar 300/4, and for the hell of it, a P67 Takumar 300/4.

It started out as just a cheap way to use MF lenses as Tilt/Shifts on my 7D, then it kind of grew into its own obsession. And if I ever move to Mamiya 645 (which I was going to do soon but instead I blew my money on those MC Zeisses), they'll all adapt (and then when I win the lottery i'll get a digital back for it).



I know it'll never happen, but an EF-mount MILC with proper 44mm flange distance and no mirror, and a sensor maybe 40x30mm is highly possible, add in Hybrid Sensor AF and IS and it'll beat almost every current MF system for everything but IQ (well, maybe IQ, but hey, this is canon with their dirty read-noise ADCs we're talking about here).

Just consider image-circles for comparison:
24x36mm, image circle is 43.3mm.
30x40mm, image circle is 50mm.
30x45mm (Leica S2 size), image circle is 54mm
33x44mm (Leaf Credo 40 size), circle is 55mm.
Blow a FF sensor up to Leaf Credo 40 or Leica S2 size, and you're only pushing each corner 6mm out further from the centre, if even that.

So yes, some lenses (that already vignette heavily on FF) won't be too useful, and EF-s is just out.
But there's a lot that don't.
Check out the vignetting results at TDP, set the aperture to f/4 or so, and notice how a lot are only 1/3 stop or less at FF corners, blow that out only 6mm wider at each corner, you'd be less than 1-stop vignetting on a 33x44mm sensor. Like the TS-Es and 8-15 as already said. How about the 100 LIS or 180L Macros? Even the 50/1.2L at f/4 looks like it'll cover 55mm image circle easily, with no more vignetting than wide-open on FF. It sure beats an EF-s 15-85 at 15mm at any aperture on APS-C.
Yes, I'm only looking stopped down. But you don't run an MF lens at f/1.2. Hell, the fastest MF lenses ever (mass) produced were f/1.8-2.0, and most primes were f/2.8, zooms are f/4 or slower.

Don't say it can't happen.
Because it can.
Technically at least.
We know that it's Canon, and they probably won't, but that's a different argument.


----------



## Wideopen (Aug 7, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> Would be nice to be able to shoot at 12800 ISO without noise ;D
> 
> I'm in



+1 same here


----------



## XanuFoto (Aug 7, 2012)

It will sell for base price USD 7000. With kit lense for 8000.


----------



## iMagic (Aug 7, 2012)

I have no experience in MF world, but doesnt Hartblei have some mechanism that allows EF lenses on MF cameras?

http://www.hartblei.de/en/hartbleicam1.htm


----------



## dr croubie (Aug 7, 2012)

iMagic said:


> I have no experience in MF world, but doesnt Hartblei have some mechanism that allows EF lenses on MF cameras?
> 
> http://www.hartblei.de/en/hartbleicam1.htm



Yep, what's being discussed is pretty much a Hartblei Hcam... except it would have an integrated sensor like a normal mirrorless camera, probably with Hyrbid AF like the EOS M, so AF and IS would work (which they don't on the HCam).
The Hartblei is about $8k (without a digital back), I don't see any potential Canon version being much cheaper.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Aug 8, 2012)

wockawocka said:


> Hmmm, how about a Canon Medium format system with a removable back and adaptor for Hasselblad bodies which consists of 2 x 1Dx sensors.



Hasselblad is a *Closed System*, their backs are the only onrs thay will work with the H3 or H4 bodies. They can't use Phase One, Leaf or Sinar backs


----------



## dr croubie (Aug 8, 2012)

c.d.embrey said:


> wockawocka said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm, how about a Canon Medium format system with a removable back and adaptor for Hasselblad bodies which consists of 2 x 1Dx sensors.
> ...



True, the H3 and H4 (and I think the H2F) can't take 3rd-party backs (nor film backs, which is annoying to some pros i've heard).

Except for the new H4X, can take any leafmiyaone back like the H1 and H2. Maybe the H4X is Hassy's way of saying, "our backs aren't that good, please don't swap systems, you can use someone else's backs just please keep buying our glass"?


----------



## c.d.embrey (Aug 8, 2012)

Freelancer said:


> the overall package from canon could be enough for many professionals to choose a MF canon over a mamiya or hasselblad.



The two things Canon lacks is high quality Fuji (Hasselblad) and Schnieder (Phas One and Mamiya) lenses and also the high quality sensors used by Hasselblad, Leaf and Phase One backs. Plus can Canon match Hasselblad's Phocus and Phase One's Capture One software?


----------



## c.d.embrey (Aug 8, 2012)

Portrait_Moments_Photogra said:


> all i can say is -
> 
> you will be AMAZED how many medium format cameras got sold to "Non Photography Professionals"
> 
> ...



Got that right!!! 

Doctors and Lawters also buy a lot of Big White lrnses. There is a Doctor, who I see from time-to-time, who shoots Surfing with Three 1D bodies and Three Big Whites. I haven't seen him recently, but my guess is that he's replaced the 1D s with 1DX s


----------



## c.d.embrey (Aug 8, 2012)

Neeneko said:


> I am rather surprised so many people are commenting about how 'silly' the idea of putting an EF lens on a MF camera is.....
> 
> I see people using Nikon FF lenses on MF view cameras fairly regularly....



Until recently Nikon MADE lenses for 4x5 and 8x10. They also made lenses for one of the Japanese Medium Format cameras.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Aug 8, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> True, the H3 and H4 (and I think the H2F) can't take 3rd-party backs (nor film backs, which is annoying to some pros i've heard).
> 
> Except for the new H4X, can take any leafmiyaone back like the H1 and H2. Maybe the H4X is Hassy's way of saying, "our backs aren't that good, please don't swap systems, you can use someone else's backs just please keep buying our glass"?



Quote from Hasselblad's site. http://www.hasselblad.com/H4x

"Give us your old H1/H2/H2F body and we’ll give you a brand new H4X, the super-charged offspring of the H1/H2, for just €3,995 excl. VAT. *This special H4X offer is only available to H1/ H2/H2F owners and is not valid without a trade-in of a Hasselblad H1 or H2/H2F camera body.*"

*Only available buy trading in your old H1/H2/H2F body.* Sounds more like they don't want people with Leaf, Phase One, Sinar or Jenoptic, etc backs replacing their H1/H2/H2F bodies with Mamiya or Phase One bodies.


----------



## Menace (Aug 8, 2012)

Canon could release a new mount / lens system for the MF body and an adaptor for EF lenses possibly in a cropped mode.

However, we'll have four mount - EFs, EF, M and MF. That's a lot of investment in production lines but if Canon can pull off MF it will certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons i.e. Nikon & Sony


----------



## preppyak (Aug 8, 2012)

Menace said:


> However, we'll have four mount - EFs, EF, M and MF. That's a lot of investment in production lines but if Canon can pull off MF it will certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons i.e. Nikon & Sony


Actually, 5 lines as Canon is also making their cine lenses in PL mount...though, it's really a whole production line just to produce those in EF mount anyway.


----------



## CharlieB (Aug 8, 2012)

Menace said:


> Canon could release a new mount / lens system for the MF body and an adaptor for EF lenses possibly in a cropped mode.
> 
> However, we'll have four mount - EFs, EF, M and MF. That's a lot of investment in production lines but if Canon can pull off MF it will certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons i.e. Nikon & Sony



Canon can do what they want. The technology exists.

The question is - does the market exist? 

What would Canon bring to the MF digital market that is not there already, and would the resultant perceived value support pricing that would make the line profitable for Canon?

Folks get excited over the technical aspects of things, but one does have to remember that Canon is a money making concern, and unless the product can be supported by the market... its a no go.

I for one cannot see an "EF in crop mode" as part of any MF camera. If you can afford the MF camera in the first place, and have the EF lenses to use in "crop mode", you almost certainly have a better performing camera body that accepts those lenses.

Folks who "need" a large sensor, high resolution imaging system do not need Canon's forte (so far) of technical experience. Those folks wont be shooting fast moving, high FPS, hard to focus types of images with MF equipment. 

I can see some marketing hype of "near MF resolution" from an EOS camera body, which reminds me of the "near 35mm resolution" claimed from the Pentax 110 system so many years ago (when I sold a ton of 'em behind the counter!).


----------



## nicku (Aug 8, 2012)

CharlieB said:


> Menace said:
> 
> 
> > Canon could release a new mount / lens system for the MF body and an adaptor for EF lenses possibly in a cropped mode.
> ...



You are right. The first aspect that Canon is profit; '' if we release a MF body we will make a profit? what the market says?''

I believe there is a big market for MF Canon bodies especially if they produce a system that accept EF lenses in some sort of crop mode. A FF sensor is covering an area of 8.65 cm2, an MF sensor (45x32) is covering around 14.4 cm2 so you will still have around 22-23 MP out of a 40MP MF sensor using EF lenses.

I only say that a MF Canon body make allot of sense ( financially and potential market share). A $8-9K MF Canon body that accepts EF lenses in crop mode will bite a considerable chunk out of Hassy and other MF producers.

The majority of pro photographers in the world are using FF bodies. I believe a jump from a 5-6k FF body to a 20K body is too much for many of them.


----------



## Hillsilly (Aug 8, 2012)

Wouldn't they go for a big MP 6x6 or 6x7 system?


----------



## moreorless (Aug 8, 2012)

CharlieB said:


> What would Canon bring to the MF digital market that is not there already, and would the resultant perceived value support pricing that would make the line profitable for Canon?
> 
> Folks get excited over the technical aspects of things, but one does have to remember that Canon is a money making concern, and unless the product can be supported by the market... its a no go.
> 
> I for one cannot see an "EF in crop mode" as part of any MF camera. If you can afford the MF camera in the first place, and have the EF lenses to use in "crop mode", you almost certainly have a better performing camera body that accepts those lenses.



I can see a large number of things Canon could bring to medium format, most obviously a much lower price but also more advanced AF, faster FPS and liveview.

By far the most obvious EF lenses to use would be the TS-E's, very useful lenses for a high megapixels landscape/architecture shooters and MF current does not offer many options, espeically when it comes to lenses as wide as the 17mm TSE. The shift maybe somewhat limated but still provide a fair bit of use at a reasonable price by MF standards.

I would agree with the earlier posts that a MF mirrorless would be the most interesting option, espeically if Canon is looking for a mass market at a lower(sub £5000 anyway) price for rich amatures aswell as pros.


----------



## pdirestajr (Aug 8, 2012)

I don't believe this rumor. Canon is moving "beyond the still" as the world evolves- their big ticket items seem to be in the cinema/ Hollywood realm. It just doesn't make sense with their brand position.


----------

