# Patent: Canon is working on shrinking the size of mirrorless cameras



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 28, 2019)

> According to a recently unearthed patent, Canon is actively working on shrinking the size of a full-frame mirrorless camera. We know that Canon is going to be bringing lots of new bodies above the current EOS R offerings, but it looks like there may be something to the thoughts that Canon may be working to add a camera below the EOS RP.
> From Japan Patent Application 2019-184921:
> An object of the present invention is to provide a technique for suppressing an increase in the size of an image pickup apparatus due to the arrangement of a motor for driving a shutter.
> Canon News further breaks down the patent here.



Continue reading...


----------



## BeenThere (Oct 28, 2019)

Personally, I don’t see much point in a camera size fit between full size and pocketable. But that’s just me. There is probably a market for this middle size. Once you are full frame, the glass is where the weight and size is located.


----------



## MartinF. (Oct 28, 2019)

If you could have a small holiday / street fullframe camerabody with interchangeable RF lenses it would be great. Minimum size with a 35mm or 50mm and still capable of mounting bigger lenses.

Sometime in the future I could surely see with af EOS-R "5D-series" and then a smaller than RP for travel / street
I sometimes miss the size of my Olympus Trip35.....


----------



## Maximilian (Oct 28, 2019)

I like the size of the EOS RP (tested in shop) and my 200D/SL2.
I also like the ergonomics of my 5D3 which seem difficult to do on a much smaller body.
I don't like the weight of my 5D3. But as said, there could be more weight on the lenses.

As long as ergonomics are well, I'd always prefer a smaller body.
That said, I do not own any of the big whites.
But with lenses like an RF70-200 or the EF100-400 II I don't see the need for a body as big as a 5D or 1D.


----------



## Architect1776 (Oct 28, 2019)

Ergonomics is the main factor. You can shrink to a point where the camera just does not feel right to most users. Large hands might see the current R cameras as too small and visa versa.
Find a good body size and concentrate on making the cameras best in class for function. Canon has the glass now worry about operation and features/function. 
If you want small go M.


----------



## Del Paso (Oct 28, 2019)

Size does matter!
I'd hate anything smaller than the EOS R, unless it's built for a very special purpose, a drone for instance...
Sorry, but my hands won't undergo size-reduction surgery.


----------



## Pape (Oct 28, 2019)

grip doesnt need to be small even camera is small and light . and always can make grip modules like sigma.
and they can prolly design somekind of turn to side grip when camera putted to pocket


----------



## Canfan (Oct 28, 2019)

Smaller and lighter is the future. Market was reluctant to embrace laptop vs desktop or current smartphone offering compared to their predecessors. Cameras will follow.
The biggest challenge would be to improve ergonomics and handling as well as lens design.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 28, 2019)

I don't see how I could use a camera smaller than EOS RP _plus extension grip_ as my main camera. However, moving a motor from near the battery compartment to below the sensor should allow for bigger batteries in the same camera form factor.


----------



## BeenThere (Oct 28, 2019)

Canfan said:


> Smaller and lighter is the future. Market was reluctant to embrace laptop vs desktop or current smartphone offering compared to their predecessors. Cameras will follow.
> The biggest challenge would be to improve ergonomics and handling as well as lens design.


Smartphones are getting larger, but thinner. The new larger models are too large for me to pocket.


----------



## PhotoSiem (Oct 28, 2019)

This only means that there will come consumer lenses too which are small and suitable (with not super interesting apertures) for consumers which are easy and cheaper too make for Canon. That is where the profits are for Canon, at the mass consumer side.


----------



## bitcars (Oct 28, 2019)

I think this body is meant for entry-level or younger consumers, to "raise the appear of Canon's product". It is not so much a new camera as a face-lift, to win back some market share during market contraction and intense competition. 

Q3 report just came out. After going through some shocking reduction in '19 sales, it seems Canon desperately needs something to win back the loss from entry-level DSLR market, which is shrinking at a rapid pace.

The larger sized body may not be deemed popular in the eyes of the new generation of buyers anymore, despite its ergonomics advantages. Whereas the reported success in M6 mark II and G series camera seems to have encouraged Canon to move towards compact camera bodies to win back customers. Customer who won't prioritize grip size like seasoned photographers would do, as their buying decisions do not consider the necessity of ergonomics.

Canon Q3 report: https://www.canonnews.com/canon-3q-2019-financial-results-poor-results-but-encouraging-details


----------



## LensFungus (Oct 28, 2019)

Canon will release a camera so small that you will never find it again in your home and so you have to buy a new one. Dammit Canon, you geniuses!


----------



## mb66energy (Oct 28, 2019)

There is always 15 ... 20 mm to shave off in width by putting the lens mount to the leftmost position but leaving enough room between lens and large enough grip.
Reducing the width of a camera helps at least to fit them snugly in lens compartments of a smaller backpack - important for me because I like a two body setup.


----------



## mb66energy (Oct 28, 2019)

LensFungus said:


> Canon will release a camera so small that you will never find it again in your home and so you have to buy a new one. Dammit Canon, you geniuses!


Use an old mobile with a prepaid card mounted on your camera so you can call for the camera ...


----------



## Franklyok (Oct 28, 2019)

Yeah, make the body as slim as phone, with pancake lens inserted into mount... That whould be great. 

If you dont like, rig it up to be suitable with yourhands... Extra grips.. Etc...


----------



## Kit. (Oct 28, 2019)

Franklyok said:


> Yeah, make the body as slim as phone, with pancake lens inserted into mount... That whould be great.


Yeah, don't forget to put there a MF sensor, IBIS and a tilty-flippy screen.


----------



## Pape (Oct 28, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Yeah, don't forget to put there a MF sensor, IBIS and a tilty-flippy screen.


screens are history , ibis isnt part of consumer level RPii design.


----------



## Shellbo6901 (Oct 28, 2019)

if you want something smaller, go with the new sigma fp.
Make lenses that are as lightweight in comparison to the camera itself. and yes that includes FF.
I can't tell you the last time other than a phone that I have put an actual camera in my pocket. A small purse yes, but never a pock and now that I think about it, probably not even once. lol


----------



## Stuart (Oct 28, 2019)

If the body was as small as a gopro and perhaps controlled from your smart phone. then the Lens may be the old thing you held - a bit like a telescope?


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 28, 2019)

PhotoSiem said:


> This only means that there will come consumer lenses too which are small and suitable (with not super interesting apertures) for consumers which are easy and cheaper too make for Canon. That is where the profits are for Canon, at the mass consumer side.


Pancake f/2.8 lenses would be great on something like this. That's a very acceptable speed and price. I used to have Canon's 40mm pancake and it was great. I could see how a cheap set of pancake/ near pancake primes would be really nice for something like this. 17, 24, 28, 35, 50mm... just like the good old days when zooms just were not that good or desirable.


----------



## flip314 (Oct 28, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Pancake f/2.8 lenses would be great on something like this. That's a very acceptable speed and price. I used to have Canon's 40mm pancake and it was great. I could see how a cheap set of pancake/ near pancake primes would be really nice for something like this. 17, 24, 28, 35, 50mm... just like the good old days when zooms just were not that good or desirable.



I'm curious to see how big "pancake" lenses will have to be with the decreased flange distance... I guess 40mm from the sensor is still not that far, it will be interesting to see if they can design lenses that are close to 20mm thick (20mm lens + 20mm flange = 40mm, though I realize this is a gross simplification and multiple elements may increase the depth of the lens)


----------



## padam (Oct 28, 2019)

I can't see them going any lower than the RP. Maybe it could be something that they may utilise in the replacement model, but that is very far away for now.


----------



## sanj (Oct 29, 2019)

I would like a small camera with choices of small lenses.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 29, 2019)

sanj said:


> I would like a small camera with choices of small lenses.


That's what Canon built the M line for. The M5/6/6 II with the EOS-M 22mm is a dream camera with stunning IQ for the size, nothing I have seen comes close to it. The EOS-M 32mm f1.4 is apparently an amazingly good lens too. Much smaller and I wouldn't be able to use it effectively.


----------



## Woody (Oct 29, 2019)

if Canon want to repeat their digital Rebel feat and overtake Sony FF MILC market share, they'll need to reduce the weight, size and price of their EOS-R cameras and lenses.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Oct 29, 2019)

It's larger size compared to Sony is a feature given they weigh about the same. Stupid move. When humans evolve tiny little fingers I'll check back in.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Oct 29, 2019)

Kind of seems pointless. The Rp is already very small. Why go smaller? Sony began their FF mirrorless journey with the 'Smaller and lighter' concept being uppermost in their design parameters. Now they are heading the other way(although will forever be stuck with that stupid lens mount because they erroneously though small was the future)


----------



## Joules (Oct 29, 2019)

The complaints whenever Canon are pushing ahead with technology are weird to me. More Megapixel, more FPS, more dynamic range, faster lenses, sharper lenses, better card slots... Somebody complained about each of them.

With something like this, it just gives them more flexibility in the design. Just because a component doesn't take up the space it used to internally, it doesn't necessarily mean that the outside will get smaller. It could just be about using that space for something else. And even if it gets smaller, the grip doesn't have to suffer. On the M6 II Canon increased the size of the grip. They know their ergonomics.


----------



## TMHKR (Oct 29, 2019)

Woody said:


> if Canon want to repeat their digital Rebel feat and overtake Sony FF MILC market share, they'll need to reduce the weight, size and price of their EOS-R cameras and lenses.


Smaller gear doesn't necessarily mean lower price, unfortunately.


----------



## BillB (Oct 29, 2019)

Woody said:


> if Canon want to repeat their digital Rebel feat and overtake Sony FF MILC market share, they'll need to reduce the weight, size and price of their EOS-R cameras and lenses.


I wonder whether Canon will make a normal zoom that is significantly smaller, lighter and cheaper than the RF 24-105. Canon seems to think that the 24-105 is a key zoom for selling RF cameras. It covers 24, 28, 35, 50, 85 and 105 and weighs (and costs) about as much as a couple of primes in those focal lengths. I don't think Canon is going to overtake anybody by coming out with small, light and cheap primes, although that would make some people very happy.


----------



## Architect1776 (Oct 29, 2019)

Pape said:


> grip doesnt need to be small even camera is small and light . and always can make grip modules like sigma.
> and they can prolly design somekind of turn to side grip when camera putted to pocket



If I get a grip I would most likely leave it on. Thus why not make the camera comfortable to begin with. As to a pocket? I do not put cameras in a pocket except for the phone in a shirt pocket and if my ILC is that small then it is too uncomfortable to use. Just my opinion on size, other will differ but that is fine.


----------



## Stichus III (Oct 29, 2019)

A full frame EOS M in an EOS M5/M6 style body, could be interesting. It would certainly make for an awesome travel camera.


----------



## Pape (Oct 29, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> If I get a grip I would most likely leave it on. Thus why not make the camera comfortable to begin with. As to a pocket? I do not put cameras in a pocket except for the phone in a shirt pocket and if my ILC is that small then it is too uncomfortable to use. Just my opinion on size, other will differ but that is fine.


I dont need pocket camera either . just intrested about theory how thin it can be made and still fully usable like what ever bigger full frame. 
I wish RP grip would be bigger what it is but ill survive with it. Must be perfect for most asian people i believe.
I doubt they make too small grips ,they just count right size from average hand sizes of peoples they plan sell it,and unfortunately they just design one size.


----------



## hmatthes (Oct 29, 2019)

I would welcome a smaller R body. I mainly shoot old Leica M (Rangefinder) lenses on my R and absolutely love the results.
The image quality is beyond expectations and the ability to zoom in for fine-focus is uncanny.
This combination is better than trying to use a rangefinder; the R is smaller than the Leica SL (non-rangefinder) and the costs are manageable.
24 meg is a large enough sensor so perhaps I'll get a Canon RP for my backup. Then use the R when using Canon lenses (huge in comparison).
Here is the R with 50 f/2 Summicron mounted, 35/f/3.5 Summaron (silver), 90 f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit (black) and 135 f/4.5 Hektor (silver). I carry the camera around my neck with the other three lenses in my jacket pockets. No bag to haul around!


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 30, 2019)

flip314 said:


> I'm curious to see how big "pancake" lenses will have to be with the decreased flange distance... I guess 40mm from the sensor is still not that far, it will be interesting to see if they can design lenses that are close to 20mm thick (20mm lens + 20mm flange = 40mm, though I realize this is a gross simplification and multiple elements may increase the depth of the lens)


This camera may end up being a FF point and shoot.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 30, 2019)

hmatthes said:


> I would welcome a smaller R body. I mainly shoot old Leica M (Rangefinder) lenses on my R and absolutely love the results.
> The image quality is beyond expectations and the ability to zoom in for fine-focus is uncanny.
> This combination is better than trying to use a rangefinder; the R is smaller than the Leica SL (non-rangefinder) and the costs are manageable.
> 24 meg is a large enough sensor so perhaps I'll get a Canon RP for my backup. Then use the R when using Canon lenses (huge in comparison).
> Here is the R with 50 f/2 Summicron mounted, 35/f/3.5 Summaron (silver), 90 f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit (black) and 135 f/4.5 Hektor (silver). I carry the camera around my neck with the other three lenses in my jacket pockets. No bag to haul around!


One of the reasons I went with the R is to use my collection of old M42 mount lenses. Love the results.


----------



## ScottyP (Oct 31, 2019)

Bah. I remember the time right before smart phones, when the trend was towards tinier and tinier phones. But they got too small to use comfortably. Remember Derek Zoolander’s absurdly tiny phone? Then things swung back into bigger phones for the bigger and bigger working screens. Cameras are the same. Unless you need it to go in your pocket, leave it big enough to hold and to have plenty of buttons.


----------

