# Unofficial Canon Mirrorless Concept



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 22, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/03/unofficial-canon-mirrorless-concept/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/03/unofficial-canon-mirrorless-concept/" 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; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/03/unofficial-canon-mirrorless-concept/"></a></div>
<strong>A Canon mirrorless concept</strong>


We know a mirrorless camera from Canon is <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/01/canon-mirrorless-in-2012/" target="_blank">likely to appear</a> in 2012. What form it takes is anyones guess. I am from the camp that Canon should do a higher end large sensor mirrorless along with a lower cost APS-C style camera.</p>
<p><a href="http://davidriesenberg.com/archives/262" target="_blank">David Riesenberg</a> has done what I think is a fantastic concept design of a Canon mirrorless camera. Anyone at Canon listening?</p>
<p><strong>The camera is based around the following ideas (Direct Quote)</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Full Frame</strong> – Might as well be the pinnacle of 35mm. Especially if a new lens mount is required. Future proof.</li>
<li><strong>18.1MP sensor from the 1DX</strong> – This camera will not rob sales from the 1DX on form factor alone so it makes sense to use an existing sensor instead of a new one. Plus, it will make an excellent pair to someone with an 1DX.</li>
<li><strong>CM-D Lens mount</strong> – That was the source of most headaches for me. Naturally, I wanted to design it around the EF mount for reasons that I don’t need to state but it proved to be very problematic. Both the flange depth and actual mount diameter meant that the camera needed to be much thicker and possibly taller to accommodate EF lenses. So this “CM-D” lens mount is roughly FD sized which keeps the dimensions close to the original and enables lenses that are not too huge.</li>
<li><strong>50mm f/1.0L “Kit Lens”</strong> – Fast primes. What can I say? I love them and they probably the best match to a system as I outlined above. So their existence is no less realistic that all the other items here. While I am far from being an optics expert, I designed this 50mm lens based on a combination of schematics of the Canon 50mm f/1L. FD f/1.2L and Leica f/0.95 so it should be a realistic representation of the dimensions of such a lens. It also features an aperture ring for direct control as well as an Auto mode for shutter priority or auto mode.</li>
<li><strong>Viewfinder</strong> – Design wise, I knew from the start that I wanted to incorporate the prism hump of the AE cameras. It is a prominent feature that without it, the context of the design gets somewhat lost. At the same time, it is obviously not a technical requirement in mirrorless cameras so making it detachable while housing the EVF felt like the optimal combination of form and function. After all, if this is a camera for photographers, a viewfinder, even if electronic, is a must.</li>
<li><strong>Flash   Flash   Flash</strong> – I regard flashes as an integral, must have feature of any system and I didn’t want to handicap its use in any form. Not when taking snapshots with the built-in one and not when the viewfinder is either attached or not.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong><a href="http://davidriesenberg.com/archives/262" target="_blank">Read more  and view tons of images of the concept</a></strong></p>
<p><em>**NOTE This is an unofficial concept design. It is NOT a Canon Inc. concept</em></p>
<p><em>Thanks Saso K</em></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## nicku (Mar 22, 2012)

Great news ..... i believe the price will be around $2000 or higher for the kit.... hmmmmm


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 22, 2012)

mmmmm.... while the f1.0 kit lens would put it way outside my price range, I think I would love a camera like this, esp if they released an EF converter at the same time. Though I think the simplicity of controls would run counter to what people who have probably around the 10k necessary for such a setup generally seems to want.

I could see such a camera really giving Leica a run for its money, but Canon generally does not seem interested in that market. So sad.


----------



## mike_s_one (Mar 22, 2012)

What a beautifull concept. Let's hope Canon is listening indeed!
Very nice retro design of the iso/asa and sutter speed dial. And the flash, wow!


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Mar 22, 2012)

Interestingly enough, CR was the first place I posted this project but went unnoticed in the depths of the forum.


----------



## mws (Mar 22, 2012)

Nice, those are some sexy looking mockups!


----------



## JR (Mar 22, 2012)

That would make a nice mirroless indeed, very much high end compared to what is out there ... question is Canon bold enought to make this happen!


----------



## ontarian (Mar 22, 2012)

Love the design, good work!

I would buy this camera. If this camera, a full frame EVIL body, were already on the market I would not have started making EdMika EOS conversion adapters for Canon FD manual focus lenses.


----------



## telephonic (Mar 22, 2012)

David, your design is awesome! (is this what people in the US say?)

My $0.02 for the concept is, the eyepiece is somehow too large and covering some portion of the LCD, which might disturb people who chimp (me included ;D)


----------



## Viggo (Mar 22, 2012)

Makte THAT camera FF bundle with that lens and I have already bought it, looks beautiful, and great size. Awesome!


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Mar 22, 2012)

telephonic said:


> David, your design is awesome!


Thank You 



> My $0.02 for the concept is, the eyepiece is somehow too large and covering some portion of the LCD, which might disturb people who chimp (me included ;D)



The eyepiece come from the iconic eyepiece of the AE-P but I am sure that if Canon were to manufacture this concept, they would happily sell a smaller one as well. Knowing Canon, for ~100$.


----------



## goodmane (Mar 22, 2012)

Also posted in link page: Stunning. Got it just right. From an affordability point of view I would personally need a 35mm f2 rather than that beast if I were to buy it all new. But the f1.0 would definitely appeal as well after initial purchase. 

I did't spot it, but I'd also want a direct button to start video recording at 720p/30fps.

I LOVE the hotshoe design in main body and viewfinder.


----------



## 7enderbender (Mar 22, 2012)

This looks all very good. Not sure if something like this would fit well into Canon's marketing concept but maybe it does. Hey, if they throw in an optical viewfinder or make it a manual focus rangefinder that is more affordable than a Leica kit I'd be buying this. Actually, I'd be giving up my EOS system for this - which brings us back to the marketing problem with the idea.

But really - anything that would pick up on the heritage of the classic Canon rangefinders and the certainly the FD system would be fabulous. Just imagine if something like this came with the FD bayonet and a bunch of new lenses matched to that design.


----------



## zim (Mar 22, 2012)

Glad the smite button is gone for this one...... Why not just make it look like the F1n


----------



## 7enderbender (Mar 22, 2012)

zim said:


> Glad the smite button is gone for this one...... Why not just make it look like the F1n



Sure. That would still be my dream camera: a full frame, manual focus F1n-D SLR for FD lenses. I can't be the only who never fully got over the switch to the EOS AF plastic lenses, can I?


----------



## mike_s_one (Mar 22, 2012)

"We know a mirrorless camera from Canon is likely to appear in 2012. What form it takes is anyones guess."

I just reread the post. Unfortunately looking at the G1X I think we'll see a formfactor closer to that camera with interchangable lenses. And the G1X sensor as well.
Oh well, we can dream, right?


----------



## stilscream (Mar 22, 2012)

Neat artwork David, but what is the point of mirrorless?
You have a great lens line-up that you're not going to use?
No, you either have an aps-c 7d-like camera so it's fps make it a mini 1d or if you're using whole new lenses, why not make a bigger, square sensor -- larger than 24x 36 the 35mm film standard. Seems to me the mirrorless are all entry level for a reason.


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 22, 2012)

stilscream said:


> Neat artwork David, but what is the point of mirrorless?
> You have a great lens line-up that you're not going to use?
> No, you either have an aps-c 7d-like camera so it's fps make it a mini 1d or if you're using whole new lenses, why not make a bigger, square sensor -- larger than 24x 36 the 35mm film standard. Seems to me the mirrorless are all entry level for a reason.



The mirrorless systems are mostly entry level for perceptual/marketing reasons rather then technological. DSLRs have a lot of inertia and status associated with them, mirrorless systems are going to have to prove themselves over time and gain acceptance before the major manufacturers risk putting 'pro' features like advanced AF on them.

Technologically though it is just a case of 'mirror vs digital viewfinder', with the newest viewfinders getting pretty good (not to mention showing you what the sensor sees rather then the lens, which has a lot of potential for previewing white balance and dealing with the optical viewfinders uselessness in very low light situations).


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Mar 22, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> Just imagine if something like this came with the FD bayonet and a bunch of new lenses matched to that design.



That's certainly an interesting idea and something that I too will be all over. The only issue with the FD mount is that it too has quite a big flange depth which will cause the camera to be considerably thicker. Personally, I don't find that to be a bad thing because I like large cameras but for this concept here I tried to balance the best I can between design, functionality and size. 

Plus, a FD mount adapter would be easy to implement without degrading IQ since it will not require any optical elements.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Mar 22, 2012)

stilscream said:


> Neat artwork David, but what is the point of mirrorless?
> You have a great lens line-up that you're not going to use?


EF lenses could be used with an adapter. Having the adapter "built in" from the get go would be a disadvantage IMO since a lot of people do want a camera to be small as possible. And this one here is not really small to begin with.



> why not make a bigger, square sensor -- larger than 24x 36 the 35mm film standard. Seems to me the mirrorless are all entry level for a reason.


I briefly thought about that but it would be even more unrealistic from a marketing point of view than this unrealistic concept.


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 22, 2012)

DavidRiesenberg said:


> I briefly thought about that but it would be even more unrealistic from a marketing point of view than this unrealistic concept.



Well, there have been occasional rumblings about Canon entering the medium format market. That would be an interesting place to test out such a design, esp since a lot of MF photographers are used to not having a mirror already.


----------



## CatfishSoupFTW (Mar 22, 2012)

curious how fast the burst fire would be. but the fact that it would possibly not support EF lenses makes me sad


----------



## Jettatore (Mar 22, 2012)

I don't think Canon should enter the Mirrorless market in this way.

EOS mount is what it is. In order for a mirror-less system to make sense and really use the smaller body possibilities, you need completely new lenses/accessories along with the new body style, at which point it doesn't matter what the name is on the camera or what equipment you already own in your existing collections. There already are systems out there that handle this, Pan/Oly > Lumix/micro 4/3rds, etc. on the reasonable price/crop side, and Leica - M series, etc. on the high price/FF side, and those systems have a huge advantage already in lens selection, etc..

Personally, for any sort of new compact style system, I think the best direction(s) for Canon is to pursue pushing the bounds of point and shoot cameras as well as higher end camera gear built into cell phones/technology partnerships. There's money in that, there's interest in that, and the field is wide open. Mirror-less/compact systems photography is a niche and it's already well covered by Leica/Panasonic and others.

Another great direction Canon can persue on EOS is bridging the gap between Full Frame and Medium Format. Much like the partial compatibility between EF and EF-S, they could go the other direction and instead of a smaller sensor, go towards Medium Format sensors, with lenses to match that are compatible with Full Frame as well, possibly even vice versa with a circular image, like an 8mm fisheye on full frame which can be cropped to square/rectangle in post. Right now a transition from entry level EF-S to Full Frame is do-able, but the jump from Full Frame to Medium Format is enormous and as sensor technology is near commonplace architecture it's nigh time to bring Medium Format to a wider market. And this one might be hard to swallow but the idea of an open source camera system, one with interchange-able mounts from any vendor and user programmable functionality, is long over-due. The markets of the future will no longer bear the outmoded, planned obsolescence/proprietary models of yesteryear, better to come to terms with that ahead of time rather then when it's too late.

(very nice 3D designs and renderings/concepts from the designer, very cool)


----------



## dtameling (Mar 22, 2012)

stilscream said:


> Neat artwork David, but what is the point of mirrorless?
> You have a great lens line-up that you're not going to use?
> No, you either have an aps-c 7d-like camera so it's fps make it a mini 1d or if you're using whole new lenses, why not make a bigger, square sensor -- larger than 24x 36 the 35mm film standard. Seems to me the mirrorless are all entry level for a reason.



I respectfully disagree that mirrorless is entry level. I've wanted a Canon mirrorless for a while. I stopped waiting and just bought a NEX-7. While it's no 5D or 1D, it easily matches or exceeds the performance of my 7D and destroys my G12...all in a package which is as pocketable. My 50D has been shelved, my G12 is now my wife's camera, and ALL of my old Minolta MC/MD and Nikkor manual focus lenses are being put back into use. I get more versatility and more performance in a package which weighs less and is more versatile. My bag is now lighter but now carries 3 cameras instead of just 2 before as I no longer have to decide between the second DSLR and a pro camcorder.

Once the Metabones EF to NEX adapter is back in stock, I'll gladly pay the $400 and all of my fast L lenses will work with the NEX as well.

In fact the NEX is working so well for me so far that I'm considering jumping to Sony for my camcorder needs too. Canon doesn't seem interested in an interchangeable lens system with a large sensor in my price range. Sony has several.

If Canon can't match or exceed what Sony and others are doing, they shouldn't bother. But if they do, I'll buy...unless I've already bought an FS100...that's the true cost of being late to the party.


----------



## 7enderbender (Mar 22, 2012)

stilscream said:


> Neat artwork David, but what is the point of mirrorless?
> You have a great lens line-up that you're not going to use?
> No, you either have an aps-c 7d-like camera so it's fps make it a mini 1d or if you're using whole new lenses, why not make a bigger, square sensor -- larger than 24x 36 the 35mm film standard. Seems to me the mirrorless are all entry level for a reason.




Not all. The M9 isn't - if you count a rangefinder as "mirrorless". I want Canon to give Leica a run for the money in that department. Either as a small and rugged full-frame manual DSLR (that would look and feel like my AE-1p for example) or a full frame rangefinder set with fast 35, 50 and 135mm lenses for total of under $5000. Or in other words: a camera for everyone who really wants an M9 but can't afford to shell out 15K or so. I mostly like my 5DII but that could be a camera I would love if done right.


----------



## 7enderbender (Mar 22, 2012)

DavidRiesenberg said:


> Plus, a FD mount adapter would be easy to implement without degrading IQ since it will not require any optical elements.



That's true and it would be nice to have that option on a full frame camera. Ideally though I'd like to see them go back to the good old mechanical lever for the aperture. I know that it's not going to happen. Just saying.


----------



## dtameling (Mar 22, 2012)

The Flange Focal Distance for FD is only 2mm less than the EF. Old EF lenses wouldn't be usable unless the body were beefy.

Though that seems to be fine for Olympus. The new K-01 follows that design though the jury is still out on if anybody adopts it...it's not much smaller than a K-5.

What could be done however is use the EF mount and instead of complex and expensive adapters like Sony has chosen to do for Alpha lenses, they would simply require an extension tube with electronic pass through for EF lenses. Then, just like they have done with EF-S, there would be a third type of EF...lets call it EF-X which would only work on the mirrorless cameras. They could ship the camera with the extension tube adapter at minimal additional cost...THAT would sell cameras as the body only option could be very appealing to folks like us. It would also eliminate the issue many other manufacturers have when they introduce a new camera with a new lens system: "It would be great but there's only 3 lenses available.".


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Mar 22, 2012)

I'd only change two things in that spec...use the 5dm3 sensor since it seems better for video. Create a decent auto focus even if you have to use a second sensor (not through lens) to determine distances.

Ok maybe removable screen, even if wired.


----------



## RobPan (Mar 22, 2012)

I fail to understand what the function of the pentaprism would be in a mirrorless camera. Where is the M-Leica-type viewfinder/rangefinder?
With some others I would prefer an 36x36 mm square format, kind of mini-Rollei so to say. A built-in flash is not needed (see the 5D). Flash is the plague of photography, gives ugly unnatural pictures and can be dispensed with most of the time if we can work with the extreme ISO speeds as seen in the 5D. 
(The late Cas Oorthuys would have been delighted if he had been able to work with the 5D.)

Kind regards,

Rob.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Mar 22, 2012)

dtameling said:


> The Flange Focal Distance for FD is only 2mm less than the EF. Old EF lenses wouldn't be usable unless the body were beefy.
> 
> Though that seems to be fine for Olympus. The new K-01 follows that design though the jury is still out on if anybody adopts it...it's not much smaller than a K-5.
> 
> _snip_



I disagree, the 50mm 1.4 SSC and 400mm 4.5 SSC FD lenses work just fine on our GH2 which is smaller than a rebel but similar in size to a Canon F1. 







It'd be nice to have the short flange distance so we can use almost every lens possible, then I can get rid of the Panasonic. Canon could make something similar to the C300, have two different mounts but instead of a PL mount they can have a mount with a short flange distance, then a mount that has EF built in for people who do not wish to play with adapters.


----------



## dtameling (Mar 22, 2012)

crazyrunner33 said:


> dtameling said:
> 
> 
> > The Flange Focal Distance for FD is only 2mm less than the EF. Old EF lenses wouldn't be usable unless the body were beefy.
> ...



They work...but only with an adapter. Flange Focal distance on 4/3 is 20mm, FD is 42mm. A GH2 style camera which accepted FD lenses natively would need to be thicker to build in the space which the adapter is creating. Depending on how miniature things can get this year, that may or may not make a viable product.

I agree however; less is better so that more lenses are compatible.


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 22, 2012)

Jettatore said:


> And this one might be hard to swallow but the idea of an open source camera system, one with interchange-able mounts from any vendor and user programmable functionality, is long over-due. The markets of the future will no longer bear the outmoded, planned obsolescence/proprietary models of yesteryear, better to come to terms with that ahead of time rather then when it's too late.



I suspect it is only a matter of time till someone starts a good DIY/OSS camera project, esp now that reprap derivatives are getting more common. I have occasionally fantasized about grabbing an Altara board and giving it a try, but then I realize I have no freetime as it is....

Still, I am starting to see some people out there with some cool ideas, and it is only a matter of time till someone grabs a low end machine vision camera from EO or something and builds something cool. This would probably move away from Canon and twoard Kodak and Sony though since you can buy their sensors (including development boards I believe) as 3rd parties. Crow, if someone was dedicated enough you can buy Kodak medium format sensors strait from them.


----------



## goodmane (Mar 22, 2012)

I have to say on reflection I'd be happier with the g1x sensor in this body so I can afford it as a second camera. But I'd probably stretch to it anyway being fullframe. 

For me the main advantage of full frame is just the bigger viewfinder which is not an issue with mirrorless. 

If it were full frame though I probably would just sell my 5D and move to the smaller format, and more asesthetic manual controls. So long as they bring a 24-70 f2.8 or f4.


----------



## infared (Mar 22, 2012)

I have to say...I love my 5D Mk II (will most likely own a III)...but I also LOVE my MFT equipment. Two bodies and 9 lenses. Yes, a complete system. No kidding. The whole thing about mirrorless, for me, is to make it small with quality. The whole point is ...you have a complete system that fits in one little bag and weighs almost nothing. So if Canon is going to jump in...it has to be a whole new design and all new lenses. Small, small..small..did I say small? But keep the glass fast...or at least offer it. I love my full-frame...and right now nothing is replacing it...but let me tell you ....some of my snobbo photo friends have seen images I have shot with MFT..and their response is..."you shot that with what???". One thing you can't beat is the fun factor of MFT..and knowing that you are also getting great images is such a kick!!!! I sell the images a galleries, regularly. Its about the image in the end.
I hope Canon jumps in full-bore....but it would take a LOT for me to give up my existing, extremely versatile MFT system...no doubt. 
I love David's rendering without the prism...RF-Style finder or add-on is a MUST though.


----------



## gmrza (Mar 22, 2012)

mike_s_one said:


> "We know a mirrorless camera from Canon is likely to appear in 2012. What form it takes is anyones guess."
> 
> I just reread the post. Unfortunately looking at the G1X I think we'll see a formfactor closer to that camera with interchangable lenses. And the G1X sensor as well.
> Oh well, we can dream, right?



There is some sense in what you are saying here. The G1X sensor fits the bill more from the point of view of cost. I have my doubts that Canon would put something into the market in the $2000+ category, which is what a full frame system would probably cost (body plus one lens).
Canon probably needs to have a play closer to $1000 (or below) in order to get the volumes to make a product viable.

Canon also has the problem that due its size as one of the biggest camera manufacturers in the world, it is very difficult to justify niche products. - A niche product would not make any appreciable difference on the Canon balance sheet, and would have to have a very very very strong strategic need to be developed.

Canon's biggest problem, right now, is probably Apple. Loads of people are ignoring P&S cameras because smartphones do an often great job of taking snapshots. (If I look at my wife, for instance, for a night out with the girls, she no longer takes a compact camera with - she takes her iPhone.)
One of the strategies that Canon appears to be following is to educate people more about photography, in order to make them more skilled, and hence more demanding of their equipment. A $2000 product would not benefit this strategy, whereas a $1000 product would (only just) form part of that kind of strategy. I believe the intention of this kind of approach is not to counter smartphones, but to drive demand for more sophisticated camera products in addition to smartphones. The 1X00D and XX0D EOS bodies fit into this strategy as they are now so cheap - a mirrorless system would probably also need to fit into that ballpark.

None of this helps anyone who would like something that follows in the lineage of rangefinder cameras, however.


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 22, 2012)

I think one thing this thread has demonstrated, if Canon was willing to take the risk, it should not release a single spiffy mirrorless solution, but instead a whole range. An entry level, a mid level, a videoographer version, and a general professional body. That would not only show Canon's commitment to the future but its competency and its ability to offer a wide ranging solution. It would also not hurt to have a range of lenses the span the use cases...

If Canon got its ass in gear, they could utterly crush this market, but I have a feeling they will cling to their current model and, just like Canon stole the crown from Kodak and Nikon.... someone will be the leader for the next 10-20 years.


----------



## stabmasterasron (Mar 23, 2012)

My two cents:

I don't think canon will develop a FF mirrorless system. Mirrorless systems are selling like hotcakes right now. Not because of the sensor size, but in spite of it. Canon knows this. If they decide they want a piece of the mirrorless market, they will develop a product that is similar to what is already out there. I mean, come on, when was the last time that Canon really went out on a limb for something. There products are usually evolutionary, not revolutionary. They probably feel safe to let Panasonic, sony, and Olympus develop the mirrorless market, then use Canon magic to sweep in with a superior product and capture a good market share when they are GD good and ready to do it. A FF mirrorless is a highly specialized product that would not have a very wide appeal, especially with the premium price that would certainly come with it. I love the idea of a FF mirrorless, but if the price were within $1000 of a 5d mk iii, I think I would take the mark iii. 

This camera is a great concept and if Canon were to make it - good for them, they had the balls to make a gutsy move.


----------



## Hillsilly (Mar 23, 2012)

Where can I buy it?

Love the concept. Like others, I'd prefer a shallower flange distance (you'd still be able to use EF and FD lenses with an adapter). But I understand the design dilema. The Olympus OM-D, which is the closest thing I can think of, looks a bit too narrow with the hump on top, and doesn't seem quite right.

If I was going to be nit-picky, I'd also suggest some form of grip on the RHS. It also looks a bit too rounded, but I'd have to see it in real life.

I like the thought that's gone into the detachable viewfinder. It looks very well integrated.

Where's the direct print button?


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Mar 23, 2012)

It _is_ a pipe dream, though I believe not mine alone. The point of actually doing this was simply to visualize this dream. That's what I do.


----------



## bycostello (Mar 23, 2012)

if only it was true!!...


----------



## Caps18 (Mar 24, 2012)

I'm not a huge fan of the viewfinder/eye piece, if the auto zoom is fast enough in live view, and the battery still works for a long time. I would rather save the size and weight.

I would want to use EF lenses, even if it meant that they would be on a cropped sensor.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Mar 24, 2012)

The EVF is detachable / optional so it should both work for people who enjoy shooting with a viewfinder and those who not. 

Ef lenses could be easily used using a simple adapter.


----------

