# Canon Doesn't Need a Compact Camera System



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 18, 2011)

```
<div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/03/canon-doesnt-need-a-compact-camera-system/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/03/canon-doesnt-need-a-compact-camera-system/"></a></div>
<strong>â€¦.according to the head of consumer imaging in Europe</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Canon doesnâ€™t need to introduce a mirrorless compact system camera (CSC), according to the head of consumer imaging in Europe, as the company does not have a problem selling its existing compact and DSLR products. In an interview with Amateur Photographer, Rainer Fuehres said that compact system cameras have been introduced by manufacturers that find it difficult to compete in the digital SLR market. Not ruling out the possibility that Canon will enter this area, Rainer stressed that if it did the reason would not be because Canon felt it had to.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Canon_doesnt_need_compact_system_camera_news_306394.html" target="_blank"></a><strong><a href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Canon_doesnt_need_compact_system_camera_news_306394.html" target="_blank">Read more at Amateur Photographer</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>CR Editorial

</strong>I pretty much disagree with everything Mr. Fuehres said in regards to Canonâ€™s place in the mirrorless world.</p>
<p>Point one, thereâ€™s no way Canon as a company thinks, â€œhey the stuff we sell now is all we need to sell, selling more stuff isnâ€™t worthwhileâ€. Canon makes money very well and selling stuff in new expanding markets is a no brainer.</p>
<p>Could Canon do it differently than Sony, m4/3 and Samsung? I think they could. There have been rumors Nikon will introduce a mirrorless camera geared to the pro market. If you go after the pro market, you donâ€™t have to worry as much about volume and youâ€™re not competing directly with the consumer level products other manufacturers are producing. If your pro mirrorless camera does well, you can slowly work your way down to the consumer market instead of the other way around.</p>
<p>From my personal experience and what Iâ€™ve seen, 80% of the people I know with mirrorless cameras do not own SLRs. Thatâ€™s a lot of customers Canon does not have. If you fear youâ€™re going to have your DSLR sales cannibalized by mirrorless cameras, just make sure itâ€™s you cannibalizing them.</p>
<p>I will note, most every M9 owner I know has a DSLR system as well. Canon doesnâ€™t need a $7000 mirrorless camera, but something in the $3000 range will give them a solid margin and they donâ€™t have to put crazy amounts of manufacturing resources behind it.</p>
<p>Now his statement about others entering the field because they canâ€™t compete in the DSLR market is somewhat true. Although thereâ€™s one company hasnâ€™t had a problem competing in the DSLR field and is doing very well in the mirrorless market, and thatâ€™s Sony. They have the resources to match Canon every step of the way.</p>
<p>Canon will introduce a mirrorless camera, and no one in the company will tip their hat to what may be coming.</p>
<p><em>thanks Ian</em></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong>
```


----------



## x-vision (Mar 18, 2011)

There you go. 

Just to clarify what the Canon executive is saying: 
In executive parlance, 'does not need' means 'no plans to make'. 

So, in case anybody is wondering - no, Canon has no plans for a mirrorless at this time.


----------



## Mescalamba (Mar 18, 2011)

Heh "Pride Will Come Before the Fall"?

Thats very stupid. Underestimating opponents is always bad thing to do.

And Panasonic didnt make m4/3s because they couldnt compete in dSLR market. They could, but they sensed bit more opportunities in advanced compact camera market and anyway they were pretty good in creating compact cameras before, so they just took it to another level. Pretty sucessfully I might add.

Olympus, I guess its bit true, though their dSLRs were actually good (good for 4/3s).

Sony just jumped on chance to have another thing to sell. As every selfrespecting camera company should.

And now should Canon imagine, they could have customers that would buy Canon mirrorless system instead of Olympus/Panasonic/Sony. If done properly, that could be a lot of customers.

Plus Canon is really underestimating others. Their current dSLR line simply sux. With exception to 5D MK2 and ofc 1D line.

Theres no reason to buy subpar Canon instead of Nikon D7000, Sony A55/A580 or Pentax K-5. Canon APS-C line is simply toasted. So now it would be actually very clever thing to do some decent mirrorless. With better sensor than that crap inside 600/60/7D.

If I was going to buy Canon, it would be only 5D or 1D line.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 18, 2011)

"Doesn't need," does not mean, "Will not."

After all, who in their right mind would contend that Canon needed to introduce the X Mark I Calculator Mouse? If the world needed such a dual-function device, people would dig through the boxes in their parents' attics to find the Casio calculator-watches they thought were so cool in grade school. Nevertheless, Canon _did_ introduce a calculator mouse, and they certainly _could_ introduce a mirrorless camera!


----------



## ronderick (Mar 18, 2011)

I guess the article is just another smokescreen - effectively much ado about nothing. 

Aside from the pompous statements from the Canon official, you can't hold him accountable if Canon turns up with a mirrorless system ready-to-go at the end of the year, since he is "not ruling out the possibility" anyways. I won't be surprised if there's stacks of mockups somewhere in the Canon R&D labs...

Of course, if we take what he says at face value, one cannot help but wonder where Canon is placing its resources. Perhaps they're investing all R&D into going medium format *shrug*


----------



## Rocky (Mar 18, 2011)

I agree with CR. I think Canon need to come up with TWO mirrorless camera that will complete with Leica M9 and the Fuji FX100. The first one is for pro's with the need for lens changing capablity and FF. The second one is for simplicity and smaller size with APS-C sensor.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 18, 2011)

A fairly transparent strategy.

Senior executives are instructed to get out there and defend the current product line. Message to consumers: "you don't want to buy our competitors' inferior products, even if it is a product that we don't offer. Our quality is better and our products can do anything they can do better."

This is designed to prevent consumers from jumping to a competitor or, at a minimum, reduce the bleeding.

When and if Canon introduces an EVIL system they will say: "We identified a market that was not being adequately met by our competitors. This market demanded a quality product and we are responding to it with our new product line. But, for everyone who has invested in our old product line, don't worry, it's still the best and this new product line will simply complement what we already produce."

The only real information coming out of this interview is that it's unlikely Canon will be introducing a compact camera system in the next 2-3 months. If they were planning to do so, the Executives would be told to talk about how Canon has some exciting announcements on the horizon, etc. etc. Sufficiently vague so as not to be pinned down, but specific enough to cause consumers to re-think buying another brand. The fact that they are being told to argue that existing lines are better indicates that Canon needs to buy a little time because they aren't ready to launch an EVIL system yet.

Now, as far as my wish list goes, the ideal Canon EVIL would be an interchangeable lens version of the Fuji FX100 with a small selection of wide-angle and normal primes and short zooms and then adapters to use existing canon lenses for telephoto.


----------



## traveller (Mar 18, 2011)

I think that this probably means: 

"Oh sh*t we didn't realise how popular these cameras would be and now it's going to take us a while to develop our own system; better reassure people that they don't need mirrorless until we have something ready to launch." 

I don't think that this is a great move, it would be far better to vaguely state that a system is under development and that it will be compatible with EF mount lenses via an adaptor. They could even make up some b*llsh*t about "developing game changing technologies" or suggest that they are working on an enthusiast centred range of lenses (something that NEX visibly lacks right now). This would go a long way to persuading EOS users to hold off buying a competitor's product until they'd seen Canon's offering. 

Oh, by the way Mescalamba, there was nothing wrong with the 18MP sensor when it was first introduced in the 7D, why has it suddenly become "crap"? The fact that it has been surpassed by the excellent new 16MP Sony APS-C sensor, simply shows how quickly the world of digital imaging is still moving; would you prefer that Canon's current offering remained the pinnacle of performance forever?


----------



## WarStreet (Mar 18, 2011)

As above, for me this means that Canon lagged on this technology and they need to gain time and limit the damage. 

Personally I am not interested in such mirrorless cameras offered by Sony, 4/3 etc... but A Canon version of the M9 or X100 will tempt me ;D 

I think such a camera is more targeted to DSLR users who wish to compliment their cameras with a compact one. Since Canon does have lots of DSLR users, producing such a camera, translates to easy money for them, and happier clients.


----------



## DuLt (Mar 18, 2011)

Couldn't canon release a Fuji X100 competitor as also completing their "Pro Compact Camera" line (S95 and G12)?

I'm talking about a low-light compact monster, that would expand their compact line.

S95 = very compact; G12= very adaptible; Mirrorless = low-light quality.


----------



## Ivar (Mar 18, 2011)

Hopefully not, at least what concerns Canon. There can be only mediocre outcome when Canon participates - carefully balanced products which in no way compete inside the company's other products, meaning that they are basically handicapped seriously to provide future temptation for upgrades but having one or two very high tech capabilities in order to sell. 



DuLt said:


> Couldn't canon release a Fuji X100 competitor as also completing their "Pro Compact Camera" line (S95 and G12)?
> 
> I'm talking about a low-light compact monster, that would expand their compact line.
> 
> S95 = very compact; G12= very adaptible; Mirrorless = low-light quality.


----------



## DuLt (Mar 19, 2011)

Sorry, I don't understand your "hopefully not".


----------



## gkreis (Mar 19, 2011)

Why not the following....

Create divisions in Canon with rough boundaries and let them duke it out? That MAKES you get off your rear and innovate, instead of putting the same sensor in umpteen tweaked cameras. Get real. Make a GREAT camera and sell lots of it until you make another GREAT camera, even if it means taking longer. Fixed product cycles aren't helpful if this what they produce.

If the point and shoot division and EVIL div. and APS-C div. and Full Frame div. were allowed to make GREAT improvements that might even shake things up in another division, let them (at least internally). That means you have to come to the head of all the divisions and know you are competing with your own guys (and of course the other companies). Then let them share what they learned with the other divisions (of course rewarding the innovators so they are fine with sharing).

So why am I wrong?


----------



## fred134 (Mar 19, 2011)

"Canon will introduce a mirrorless camera"... It doesn't need to be mirrorless, it just needs to be compact.

Obviously, Canon doesn't yet know what direction to go, and doesn't want to commit too early to a new lens mount.
If they could make it compact, but with an optical viewfinder (on higher models for example), wouldn't it be nice ?


----------



## dougkerr (Mar 19, 2011)

Canon already makes quite a few "compact" cameras (my "rank" in this forum honors one), so I assume that what is being discussed here is an interchangeable lens camera system whose controlling dimensions are smaller than for the EOS family.

I am not personally interested in the availability of a reflex form in such a supposed new line, but if in fact Canon feels the need to be able to offer such, we might see indications of that in the choice of a larger back flange distance for the new system than we would otherwise expect (just as the Four Thirds system has a larger back flange distance than the Micro Four Thirds system, which is not considered to reasonably support a reflex configuration, as the Four Thirds system does).

Best regards,

Doug


----------



## Jonathan (Mar 19, 2011)

I think, imho, that Canon doesn't want to make a mirrorless camera, but at least a "mirrorless camera" competitor.
For that, i pretty sure they will keep a mirror.
Either a traditionnal slapping mirror or either a fixed pellix mirror much like Sony and their SLT translucent line.


----------



## spam (Mar 19, 2011)

What else can they say until their evil-system is ready?


----------



## Rocky (Mar 19, 2011)

I can understand why Canon is hesitate going into the "mirrorless"/ "EVIL" business. They have already have the G12 and S95 for the high end non-professional area. So the new "mirrorless" needs to be in the professional area (read it as expensive). Let us have a look in what most of the existing "mirrorless" models (except Leica M9)now. They all have auto focus with about 0.3 to 0.5 second shutter focus delay ( same delay for most of the point and shoot). Now howmany professional will or can live with this kind of delay?? Leica M9 takes a totally differeent approach. IT uses manual focusing with built in range finder.So thes hutter delay will be less than 0.1 second. However. This will make the lens and body focusing mechanism to be very complicated. That is why the lens and body are so expensive. Also how many people nowadays knows how to or want to use a range finder for focusing?? Until Canon can come up with a fast auto focusing system based on "Live View", Canon will be hesitate to go into the high end morrorless business.


----------



## AJ (Mar 19, 2011)

IMO the most sensible thing to do would be to have an EF-S compatible system, similar to Sony NEX.

Canon would sell more EF-S lenses, and folks with DSLR bodies might be tempted to pick up a mirror-less body as an addition to the kit.

A mirror-less body coupled with plastic lenses like 18-55 would be pretty compact and light.

Now, Canon, let's please see some light EF-S primes!


----------



## Rocky (Mar 19, 2011)

AJ said:


> IMO the most sensible thing to do would be to have an EF-S compatible system, similar to Sony NEX.
> 
> Canon would sell more EF-S lenses, and folks with DSLR bodies might be tempted to pick up a mirror-less body as an addition to the kit.
> 
> ...


The mgic word here is "compact camera system". So in order for it to be compact, the camera needed to be a lot thinner than the existing EOS DSLR. Also due to thinner body, the lens can be made shorter and smaller. Also the EF-S or EF lens mount is relatively big. That will also defeat the "compact" purpose. So the new system needed to be with all new system lens to make it compact. However, an EF-S/EF lens adapter should be available for people that do not care about size and want to use the existing lens.


----------



## Flake (Mar 20, 2011)

Having been looking at these cameras with a friend who bought a G12 there are a few pros & cons to them.

The biggest Pro to the evil system is the sensor size is APS-C (28.7 x 16mm) while the G12 sensor, although larger than other compacts is only 7.6 x 5.7mm This is the reason I am going to wait until Canon do manage to come up with a camera in this growing sector.

The G12 is without doubt a very good camera and even Iso 800 is useable and it's small enough and light enough to drop into a handbag, which is the problem with the Sony NEX system. The body is really nice thin & light, it's the lens which is the issue, totally out of proportion with the body and of a similar size to an EF-s type. It makes a distinct right angle shape which is difficult to carry except in a dedicated case when not in use.

Despite that I want a camera which is not going to be too far away from the 5D MkII currently the G12 sells for Â£360 The NEX 5 with 18 - 55mm for Â£480 I'm sure that if Canon can produce a similar product at that kind of price they will have a winner, and looking at the Sony sales I think that will be a matter of when not if.


----------



## zalmagor (Mar 20, 2011)

It seems to me the question is a bit more complex than that.

Canon is constantly working on 7 DSLR lines (1D, 1Ds, 5D, 7D, xxD, xxxD, xxxxD), three lines of compacts, and three lines of lenses (EF, EF-S, and compact).

Question is whether Canon can start another line of bodies with it's own line of lenses (an adapter could be used to make EF lenses compliment this line, but Canon would have to make some new lenses), with money earned making more than the money lost in adjacent camera lines. Making EVIL cameras might make Canon stretch itself too thin.

Considering there are 7 announced lenses that haven't reached the market yet, and the recent events in Japan, I'd be surprised if Canon announced EVIL cameras in the near future.


----------



## Admin US West (Mar 20, 2011)

Canon is definitely working on a compact camera, the recently filed patent for a lens adapter tells us that. It does not have a quick return mirror, which could mean pellix or mirrorless, but it is definitely a new camera and lens system.

From Patent 

[0004]In response to the desire to decrease the size and weight of digital single reflex lens cameras, in recent years a new type of single lens reflex camera that differs from the conventional single lens reflex camera has been proposed. *The new type of single lens reflex camera is not provided with a quick return mirror for guiding the imaging light flux to a viewfinder, and the flange back is shorter than that of a conventional camera.* The new type of interchangeable lenses having a short flange back that is compatible with this new type of camera has been proposed. However, these new type of interchangeable lenses cannot easily handle a variety of photographic conditions because there are few models. Therefore, there are cases in which it is desirable to use in the new type of camera the conventional type of interchangeable lenses that have already been introduced to the market and for which there are ample models and quantities. Thus, a conversion adapter for connecting the conventional type of interchangeable lenses with the new type of camera body is necessary. The functions required of this conversion adapter generally include matching the differing mounting profiles of the lenses and the camera body, matching the differing flange backs of the lenses and the camera body, and not hindering the communication system between the lenses and the camera body.


----------



## kawasakiguy37 (Mar 21, 2011)

Id love to see a mirrorless canon FD mount system, adapter for new lenses.


----------



## DuLt (Mar 21, 2011)

scalesusa said:


> Canon is definitely working on a compact camera, the recently filed patent for a lens adapter tells us that. It does not have a quick return mirror, which could mean pellix or mirrorless, but it is definitely a new camera and lens system.
> 
> From Patent
> 
> [0004]In response to the desire to decrease the size and weight of digital single reflex lens cameras, in recent years a new type of single lens reflex camera that differs from the conventional single lens reflex camera has been proposed. *The new type of single lens reflex camera is not provided with a quick return mirror for guiding the imaging light flux to a viewfinder, and the flange back is shorter than that of a conventional camera.* The new type of interchangeable lenses having a short flange back that is compatible with this new type of camera has been proposed. However, these new type of interchangeable lenses cannot easily handle a variety of photographic conditions because there are few models. Therefore, there are cases in which it is desirable to use in the new type of camera the conventional type of interchangeable lenses that have already been introduced to the market and for which there are ample models and quantities. Thus, a conversion adapter for connecting the conventional type of interchangeable lenses with the new type of camera body is necessary. The functions required of this conversion adapter generally include matching the differing mounting profiles of the lenses and the camera body, matching the differing flange backs of the lenses and the camera body, and not hindering the communication system between the lenses and the camera body.



Is it possible to make a pellix mirror that "somehow" doesn't dim the viewfinder while framing?


----------



## dougkerr (Mar 22, 2011)

DuLt said:


> Is it possible to make a pellix mirror that "somehow" doesn't dim the viewfinder while framing?


_Pellix_ is the tradename of a Canon camera. It uses a fixed, semi-reflective _pellicle_ mirror (a mirror whose substrate is a stretched thin film - the term itself does not imply anything else about the mirror) in a single-lens reflex configuration.

A single-lens reflex camera using a fixed semi-reflective mirror can have a mirror box that is a bit shorter than the mirror box for a moving mirror system.

A fixed semi-reflective mirror in a single-lens reflex camera (pellicle or otherwise) inevitably results in some light loss in both the taking and viewing paths.

What kind of arrangement do you have in mind?

Best regards,

Doug


----------



## dougkerr (Mar 22, 2011)

kawasakiguy37 said:


> Id love to see a mirrorless canon FD mount system, . . .


[/quote]
You mean no autofocus, mechanical aperture control?



> . . . adapter for new lenses.


What kind of new lenses? They would have to have a back flange distance of at least 50mm or so (could not even be EF lenses).

Best regards,

Doug


----------



## DuLt (Mar 22, 2011)

dougkerr said:


> DuLt said:
> 
> 
> > Is it possible to make a pellix mirror that "somehow" doesn't dim the viewfinder while framing?
> ...



Some sort of kerr cell shutter. The mirror only becomes semi-transparent with an electrical impulse.


----------



## dougkerr (Mar 22, 2011)

DuLt said:


> Some sort of kerr cell shutter. The mirror only becomes semi-transparent with an electrical impulse.


Oh, interesting thought.

Not invented by me, by the way - by a cousin, we assume.

Best regards,

Doug


----------



## DuLt (Mar 22, 2011)

dougkerr said:


> DuLt said:
> 
> 
> > Some sort of kerr cell shutter. The mirror only becomes semi-transparent with an electrical impulse.
> ...



Off course, that's the basics of all troll physics.


----------



## Jonathan (Mar 22, 2011)

dougkerr said:


> DuLt said:
> 
> 
> > Some sort of kerr cell shutter. The mirror only becomes semi-transparent with an electrical impulse.
> ...



I've seen on 43rumors, that Olympus is working on this kind of thing for a "pen pro".


----------



## goodmane (Mar 22, 2011)

I am heavily invested in Canon. 5D, G9, 24-70L and several flashes.... _very_ heavily I suppose you could say given its just a hobby. 

I love the whole kit. But the G9 is crap (compared to a bigger sensor camera) for dynamic range outside - its like a webcam, keeps burning out faces etc , and I don't want to use my 5D outdoors much anymore. When my kid reaches 3 or 4 I will want to replace the G9 with something like a Fuijo X100 but with a few different lens options and that will work with a Canon flash (ideally). 

If Canon are not ready - they have 2 years for my business to catch up- I'll have to go elsewhere; possibly for everything. I'm sure I'm not alone.


----------



## colin1984 (Mar 12, 2012)

I´m also the opinion Canon doesn´t need a CCS, I´ve worked three years in an Electronic Market maybe you know MEDIA MARKT, and I think it was 12.2009 or a little later when Olympus comes with the first PEN, this Camera wasn´t a good Seller alltough Olympus made a lot of promotion if you remember then there was the second Edition and than ther was Sony and not any of these Cameras sells well, in our Region, the ccs´s were also called a dead article, In my carreer I´ve selled them twice once fully priced and once which was in clearence sell because it was too old,

So my opinion is that these CCS aren´t as good as dslr´s and the price for them is extremly high in compare with price/performance.

With friednly Regards

Colin


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 12, 2012)

within 2 years compact cameras will be dead as phone cameras are already heaping the burial dirt on them now

but a pro build mirror less high MP APS-H that has a crop mode to APS-C and increased FPS in that mode will be killer
Yeah i know i say it a lot  but i can dream can't I?


----------



## bycostello (Mar 12, 2012)

shame they are saying that... once you start with a different manufacturer they might lose the hole business... disappointed with the G1X, so slooow shutter lag.... looking like olympus for me..


----------



## Bennymiata (Mar 12, 2012)

I agree with Colin.
Why would Canon go to all the trouble to make a new EVIL camera only for it to sit on the shelves like most of the other EVIL's out there, gathering dust?

Sure, when they were first introduced, they sold to the "Must have the newest thing" people, but that market has died down since people realised that an entry level DSLR is cheaper and far better.

The G1X is basically Canon's answer to EVILS, although the lens is fixed, it's zoom range covers about 90% of what most people would use anyway.
All they have to do now is to copy the Lumix focussing system and they would be home and hosed.

The sales of DSLR's are getting stronger every day, so if I was Canon, I'd be putting most of my resources into these.


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 12, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> within 2 years compact cameras will be dead as phone cameras are already heaping the burial dirt on them now



I doubt this. I think technical people tend to forget that while they and their friends all love the new high tech toys, much of the market does not really care for them. Not everyone is interested in getting fancy phones that do a dozen different things poorly, need to be replaced every 2-3 years, and rarely have any physical controls.

All we are seeing is an adjustment in the market as more options mean people who had compact cameras but are better served by smartphones migrate to those. After that segment has transitioned things will stabilize again.


----------



## Musouka (Mar 12, 2012)

Neeneko said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > within 2 years compact cameras will be dead as phone cameras are already heaping the burial dirt on them now
> ...



This is the sensor size of Nokia 808:






Source: DPreview

As you can see, it's bigger than most P&S cameras. Once similar technologies find their way into smartphones, why would most people bother buying P&S. They will be willing to pay slightly for the phone if it will save them some money compared to buying phone + P&S.


----------



## colin1984 (Mar 12, 2012)

Musouka said:


> Neeneko said:
> 
> 
> > wickidwombat said:
> ...



I agree with that, but at the moment smartphones are only equal in high light, try to shoot in low light, than you´ll see that p&s cameras are still over the top compared with smartphones, and in my opinion this will last for a long time they can´t build so small and good lenses, alltouhg the p&s aren´t good lenses at all, but try to match a smartphone with the complete technic from a p&s camera with 3-5x zoom, and than you got a smartphone thick like a ham and chees Toast.

Hope you all know what I mean.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 12, 2012)

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/15/Cipa_publishes_mirrorless_sales_and_shipments

Not sure why everyone seems to think mirrorless camera sales are stagnant. This article seems to say otherwise, and I have seen other articles with a similar message.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 12, 2012)

This is a year old article from March 2011.

Canon has the G1 X which what he was pointing to without revealing anything in that interview. Several other interviews also pointed to the G1 X.


----------

