# Patent: Canon speedbooster for EOS M



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 30, 2018)

> It looks like Canon is developing its own speedbooster for EF lenses on the EF-M mount.
> Canon News uncovered a patent last week that showed Canon was looking at a new EOS M adapter, and again this week, a new patent showing the concept in more detail has emerged.
> *Japan Patent Application 2018-189864:*
> This patent application is for a converter that takes EF lenses and reduces the focal length and decreases the aperture all at once.
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Woody (Nov 30, 2018)

Awesome! This will make the EOS-M even more attractive! I love my M5 and EF-M 32mm f/1.4 lens. Can't wait for more stuff!


----------



## bertzie (Nov 30, 2018)

Could also be a possibility for an APS-C EOS-R camera. The R mount has a flange distance of 20mm, the M 18mm. So if they designed it for the R, all they would have to do is swap out the mount and add 2mm for the M.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 30, 2018)

> If Canon is indeed going to keep the EOS M line around, ...





bertzie said:


> Could also be a possibility for an APS-C EOS-R camera.


 
lol. you guys don't give up ... but .. Canon APS-C = EOS M. I don't see an "if" here. 

I would likely buy an original Canon speedbooster for EF lenses on EF-M.


----------



## jolyonralph (Nov 30, 2018)

Not with this design, but there's no reason why Canon couldn't design an RF -> EF-M speed booster if they really wanted. It'd be the only way to adapt RF glass for EOS-M bodies.


----------



## criscokkat (Nov 30, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Not with this design, but there's no reason why Canon couldn't design an RF -> EF-M speed booster if they really wanted. It'd be the only way to adapt RF glass for EOS-M bodies.


I am not sure how you make a lens have 22 extra mm at minimum to adapt an RF lens. The registration distance of RF is 2 mm less than the M, and I can't see any adapter robust enough to hold a RF lens that would be less than 20mm deep, especially if it has to have some optics that increase the registration distance like that.


----------



## Tom W (Nov 30, 2018)

An interesting idea - and not far-fetched at all. There's enough room in the EF to M adapter to incorporate lens elements that will shorten the focal length as suggested. And without changing the physical characteristics of the aperture (diameter), the shorter focal length with the same aperture diameter = a lower numerical (larger) f/stop.

Mathematically, say you have a 50 f/2 lens. If you were to shorten the focal length, optically through the adapter, you could have, say, a 25 mm f/1 lens. Why? An f/2 50 mm lens has a 25 mm aperture diameter (focal length/2). That same 25 mm aperture on a 25 mm focal length lens would become an f/1.

Now, I'm sure that a 2:1 lens adaptation would be kind of extreme, but something like a 1.25:1 or 1.4:1 shortening ratio would be less prone to problems.


----------



## Tom W (Nov 30, 2018)

What if my old 85 f/1.2 could be the mythical 50 f/1. 

Quirks and all.


----------



## cpreston (Nov 30, 2018)

I could have sworn that a speed booster rumor was already reported back when the first M was released. At the very least, I remember reading that Metabones was looking into a design. I just figured that there was never enough possible buyers for it to seem worth releasing.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 30, 2018)

Tom W said:


> An interesting idea - and not far-fetched at all.



well, in case you are not aware, "speedbooster adapters" exist as real products for a number of years already.
http://www.metabones.com/products/?c=speed-booster

Only interesting question is, why neither Metabones nor Canon have not already launched an EF / EF-M speedbooster long ago.

And if Canon also charges €/$ 649 like Metabones, then I'll pass. My idea is €/$ 199 max. But Canon being Canon, they may well bring a white-paint EOS "L" speedbooster at 999


----------



## 4fun (Nov 30, 2018)

cpreston said:


> I could have sworn that a speed booster rumor was already reported back when the first M was released. At the very least, I remember reading that Metabones was looking into a design. I just figured that there was never enough possible buyers for it to seem worth releasing.



well, the issue i see is Metabones pricing: 649 per click will for sure seriously curb demand.


----------



## transpo1 (Nov 30, 2018)

Ahh, so that's how they're going to get around the 1.8x crop in 4K


----------



## Bambel (Nov 30, 2018)

4fun said:


> And if Canon also charges €/$ 649 like Metabones, then I'll pass. My idea is €/$ 199 max.



I started a thread about the Viltrox speed booster EF on EOS M. It's even less than €199 and the first impressions are not bad. Unfortunately, i didn't had the time to shoot some real photos but i will post some in a few days.

https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...r-x0-71-for-ef-lenses-on-eos-m-with-af.36329/

B.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 30, 2018)

thx for the Viltrox speed booster info - just found it myself too, was about to post about it.

Now it is clear to me, why all of a sudden Canon/Metabones also want to get in on it. "Innovative" Canon always needs somebody else doing it first, before they also become "innovative" ... in due course ...


----------



## Bob Howland (Nov 30, 2018)

How about an 85 f/0.9? Given the sizes of the Canon APS-C and FF sensors, it is mathematically possible to make a speed booster give 1-1/3 stops of "improvement". It's a tight fit and I imagine that there would be significant vignetting and distortion at the edges.

Off topic, I really wish that Canon would drop the price of the EF-M adapter by about 2/3. It's just an extension tube and costs twice as much as the EF-RF basic adapter, which almost certainly includes electronics.


----------



## zonoskar (Nov 30, 2018)

Only four years too late. Besides, I already ordered the Viltrox adapter.


----------



## Stuart (Nov 30, 2018)

Great idea for soaking up all the future free EF lenses if/when owners move to EOS R. Also will encourage 'upgrades' from old EF body cameras to new EOS-M bodies. A much more dynamic market offering to keep customers Canon.
 i love the idea of finding more light that a lens previously had possible.


----------



## efmshark (Nov 30, 2018)

criscokkat said:


> I am not sure how you make a lens have 22 extra mm at minimum to adapt an RF lens. The registration distance of RF is 2 mm less than the M, and I can't see any adapter robust enough to hold a RF lens that would be less than 20mm deep, especially if it has to have some optics that increase the registration distance like that.



Speed boosters have lenses in the optical path, so it is possible to deal with this situation.


----------



## canonnews (Nov 30, 2018)

4fun said:


> thx for the Viltrox speed booster info - just found it myself too, was about to post about it.
> 
> Now it is clear to me, why all of a sudden Canon/Metabones also want to get in on it. "Innovative" Canon always needs somebody else doing it first, before they also become "innovative" ... in due course ...



Funny.

Except that Canon originally filed the patent application back in 2017.


----------



## photonius (Nov 30, 2018)

hmm, if this makes it to the market, it could mean that Canon sees no reason to make specialised fast lenses for EOS-M, just get the booster and slap an EF lens on. But how long will EF lenses live, when RF takes of ....


----------



## tmroper (Nov 30, 2018)

Sounds like a way around that severe 4K crop on the EOS R and 5DIV.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 30, 2018)

tmroper said:


> Sounds like a way around that severe 4K crop on the EOS R and 5DIV.


It's funny how everybody raves about the GH5/s and yet it has a smaller 4k sensor than the R.


----------



## dak723 (Nov 30, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> It's funny how everybody raves about the GH5/s and yet it has a smaller 4k sensor than the R.



Because people complain about what is perceived as a shortcoming - or a "crippling" of a feature...until they actually use it and realize that a crop when doing video is almost always a plus.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 30, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Because people complain about what is perceived as a shortcoming - or a "crippling" of a feature...until they actually use it and realize that a crop when doing video is almost always a plus.


Yes, and the GH5 video AF is a joke and the GH5s doesn't have video AF...


----------



## tmroper (Nov 30, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> It's funny how everybody raves about the GH5/s and yet it has a smaller 4k sensor than the R.


When you're using a GH5, you're mostly likely using one set of MFT lenses along with it, for both stills and video. The problem with the Canon 4K crop is, you might need a different set of lenses to shoot video with it, and that's an expensive, complicated hassle for non-video professionals. For many, it's preferable to use the same lenses for both stills and video. For others--like actual cinematographers--it's no big deal. But that's the source of the complaints I think.


----------



## 4fun (Nov 30, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> It's funny how everybody raves about the GH5/s and yet it has a smaller 4k sensor than the R.



Panasonic is delivering the very best video they can with a puny little 225 mm2 mFT sensor. they cannot utilize more than what is physically available.

Canon uses an FF sensor but is not willing or not able to implement "4k video on late 2018 standards" and only uses a fraction of the 864 mm2 light-sensitive surface at their disposal.

that's the difference. that's why they are criticized.

personally i don't care for video recording at all and would prefer a stills camera without it. but if Canon insists on sticking video recording into each and every of their cameras and make all buyers pay for it, they better do it "really right" instead of "half-assed" ... or swallow the flak they are rightfully getting for it.

it is as if Porsche were to launch a sports car with 380 HP (FF sensor) but it would only use 2 of the 6 cylinders (massive video crop factor) and therefore only reach 120 km/h top speed (sub-par video performance), they would also be criticized. not even their most hardcore fanboyz would call it "a good thing because 1. it is much safer that way, 2. much better for the environment and 3. saves a lot of speeding tickets".

As opposed to Canon fanboyz ...


----------



## padam (Nov 30, 2018)

I don't think Canon will do an RF mount focal reducer while they only have FF cameras, because it would be unusable for stills. They might not bother making one at all to make their lower megapixel Pro model more attractive, they just want to keep their models as segmented as possible. Unless they decide to move their S35mm Cinema cameras over to the new mount as well, then they might be more inclined to do it.

Looks like that they've made it 0.8x (probably to preserve optical quality), so the 'new' crop factor on the M series is 1.28x for stills and 2x for the M50 4k video.


----------



## bertzie (Dec 1, 2018)

4fun said:


> lol. you guys don't give up ... but .. Canon APS-C = EOS M. I don't see an "if" here.
> 
> I would likely buy an original Canon speedbooster for EF lenses on EF-M.



How many EOS-M bodies have a magnesium chassis? How many of them have weather sealing? How many have both? The EOS-M series is not a professional series of cameras, it's a toy built for soccer moms. The final evolution from the powershot series. There are too many professional APS-C shooters out there for Canon not to make an APS-C R camera, and the EOS-M series is simply inadequate for that need. For christ sake, they don't even make a battery grip for any of the EOS-M cameras.


----------



## bertzie (Dec 1, 2018)

padam said:


> I don't think Canon will do an RF mount focal reducer while they only have FF cameras, because it would be unusable for stills. They might not bother making one at all to make their lower megapixel Pro model more attractive, they just want to keep their models as segmented as possible. Unless they decide to move their S35mm Cinema cameras over to the new mount as well, then they might be more inclined to do it.
> 
> Looks like that they've made it 0.8x (probably to preserve optical quality), so the 'new' crop factor on the M series is 1.28x for stills and 2x for the M50 4k video.



Just because they've pattened it now doesn't mean it's coming out any time soon. Patents give us insight into their planning for the future.


----------



## padam (Dec 1, 2018)

bertzie said:


> Just because they've pattened it now doesn't mean it's coming out any time soon. Patents give us insight into their planning for the future.


If you read back, you can see that it was submitted earlier.
Seems like the perfect accessory to push the EOS M5 Mark II to the market a bit firmer, and to answer some criticism about their lens line-up as well.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Dec 1, 2018)

bertzie said:


> How many EOS-M bodies have a magnesium chassis? How many of them have weather sealing? How many have both? The EOS-M series is not a professional series of cameras, it's a toy built for soccer moms. The final evolution from the powershot series. There are too many professional APS-C shooters out there for Canon not to make an APS-C R camera, and the EOS-M series is simply inadequate for that need. For christ sake, they don't even make a battery grip for any of the EOS-M cameras.



...with your "it's a toy built for soccer moms" line, you win the internet today. Winner winner chicken dinner!


----------



## dak723 (Dec 1, 2018)

bertzie said:


> How many EOS-M bodies have a magnesium chassis? How many of them have weather sealing? How many have both? The EOS-M series is not a professional series of cameras, it's a toy built for soccer moms. The final evolution from the powershot series. There are too many professional APS-C shooters out there for Canon not to make an APS-C R camera, and the EOS-M series is simply inadequate for that need. For christ sake, they don't even make a battery grip for any of the EOS-M cameras.



I agree that Canon will make a APS-C R camera at some point because the M is not a body that will goes well with any sort of large EF lens - and is so small that even a zoom beyond 200mm has not been made for the system. But one can produce very professional results with an M camera and it is far more than a "toy". 

Not sure why people on this and other forums feel the constant need to put people down. I use the M to produce professional level photos that are just as sellable as photos I have taken over the years with bigger cameras.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 1, 2018)

i still use the 1st gen original M. It has been on many mountains with me in all sorts of weather, summer and winter. Once it fell into deep snow and i accidentally skied over it. Dug it out, wiped it off and it just kept working without a problem, despite no official weather sealing. Still working well today after close to 50k clicks. Proudly wearing a few battle marks. Not bad for a cheap little toy. 

An upcoming M5 successor might well be (slightly) bigger with a (somewhat) bigger grip, stronger battery, (even) tougher chassis, full weather sealing and a top-notch AF system. And Canon might call it "EOS M7". Are you ready for action, soccer moms, birders and outdoor sports afficionados? 

No need for an FF-sized, but only crop-sensored EOS R model. EOS R is about FF ... all the way.


----------



## mb66energy (Dec 1, 2018)

photonius said:


> hmm, if this makes it to the market, it could mean that Canon sees no reason to make specialised fast lenses for EOS-M, just get the booster and slap an EF lens on. *But how long will EF lenses live, when RF takes of ...*.



As long as users see an advantage of using polarizers/ND-Filters/other filters in the EF-RF adapter at least. And while those who have not the money or don't want to buy into a new system every 3 years use their EF lens toolkit. If you use only EF lenses on EOS R bodies you need one adapter. If you begin to mix EF and RF but you use only 2 EF-lenses and x RF lenses you need only two adaptors to have a clean RF mount on every lens. 200 bucks to adapt a 2000 EUR/$ lens flawlessly is a cheap solution to be compatible!
But on the long term you are right And I do not see a EF 1.8 85 IS lens but an RF one one the (far?) horizon.

About EOS-M: I really like the EF-M 32 for its compact size but if I could adapt e.g. the EF 2.0 100 with a 0.7 speedbooster it will become a moderately compact 1.4 70mm lens with a very useful FL (for me at least).


----------



## mb66energy (Dec 1, 2018)

4fun said:


> [...]
> 
> no need for an FF-sized but crop-sensored EOS R model.



I am not shure about this - thinking of a photographer who wants to use RF 1.2 50 on a crop sensor due to quality reasons and the need for e.g. 10 fps with tracking. Or if compact lightweight RF 2.x y00mm lenses enter the market: A faster small sensor camera might help sports photographers.
If Canon cannot circumvent the "slow" DPAF sensors by on chip preprocessing or whatever measure they maybe try to reduce sensor size to increase overall speed.
I think that Canon never hesitated to bring strange products on the market - if they survive: o.k and if they die: o.k. too.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 1, 2018)

mb66energy said:


> About EOS-M: I really like the EF-M 32 for its compact size but if I could adapt e.g. the EF 2.0 100 with a 0.7 speedbooster it will become a moderately compact 1.4 70mm lens with a very useful FL (for me at least).



There is a caveat: older EF lens designs like EF 100/2.0 and EF 85/1.8 got AF drives designed for use with off-sensor, detached Phase-AF in (D)SLRs. AF performance in live view or when adapted to mirrorfree cameras is ... "very pedestrian". 

Newer EF lenses, especially with STM or Nano-USM AF drive are much better suited. I use EF 40/2.8 STM and 50/1.8 STM on EOS-M and they work well. Those 2 would also be my "prime candidates" (pun intended) ;-) for use with a "speedbooster" EF-M adapter.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 1, 2018)

mb66energy said:


> I am not shure about this - thinking of a photographer who wants to use RF 1.2 50 on a crop sensor due to quality reasons and the need for e.g. 10 fps with tracking



I don't understand the "crop" part in the sentence. Users able to afford super-premium lenses like RF 50/1.2 will just wait a bit for a higher-grade EOS R model with 10 fps tracking ("mirrorfree 1D-X III"). When needed, they will just flick a switch on the camera and shoot in crop mode on a 50-75 MP FF sensor to get 30 MP "crop" images.


----------



## mb66energy (Dec 1, 2018)

4fun said:


> I don't understand the "crop" part in the sentence. Users able to afford super-premium lenses like RF 50/1.2 will just wait a bit for a higher-grade EOS R model with 10 fps tracking ("mirrorfree 1D-X III"). When needed, they will just flick a switch on the camera and shoot in crop mode on a 50-75 MP FF sensor to get 30 MP "crop" images.



O.k., trying again because I was not precise enough:
Think about a user who needs the RF (EDIT 50 1.2 for FF for medium fast to slow photography needs also a way to photograph fast objects and can use 80mm equiv for this purpose. (same for e.g. 2.0 200 vs. 2.0 320 equiv)

IMO you cannot read out a FF sensors APS-C crop area 1.6**2 times = 2.56 times faster because you have the other pixels electronics in the way. And if it just is the capacitance of the read out lines which avoids higher read out frequencies.
Make a real crop sensor and you can do your readout maybe 2... 2.5 times faster.
Additionally a mechanical shutter has only to travel ~60% of the way compared to FF and the moving mass of the shutter blades is reduced by at least a factor of 2 ... if not more because you can use thinner blades too.

To be compatible mount-wise it would make sense (to me) to offer an EOS RF mount APS-C camera for the above mentioned user.


----------



## mb66energy (Dec 1, 2018)

4fun said:


> There is a caveat: older EF lens designs like EF 100/2.0 and EF 85/1.8 *got AF drives designed for use with off-sensor, detached Phase-AF in (D)SLRs*. AF performance in live view or when adapted to mirrorfree cameras is ... "very pedestrian".
> 
> Newer EF lenses, especially with STM or Nano-USM AF drive are much better suited. I use EF 40/2.8 STM and 50/1.8 STM on EOS-M and they work well. Those 2 would also be my "prime candidates" (pun intended) ;-) for use with a "speedbooster" EF-M adapter.



I never felt a large difference between off sensor PD AF and on sensor PD AF (called DPAF in Canon land  in terms of speed with EF 100 Macro non-IS and EF 70 200 4.0 IS. Only remarkable difference: the AF precision is much higher ... in DPAF. Just tried the EF 2.0 100 minutes ago with the M50 and it works very fast and without hunting - and Servo works flawlessly. No pedestrian feel  It isn't as smooth as EF-M 32 and for video STM lenses ARE BETTER for sure.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 1, 2018)

@mb66energy ... yes. But I think that niche is extremely small. 



mb66energy said:


> Additionally a mechanical shutter has only to travel ~60% of the way compared to FF and the moving mass of the shutter blades is reduced by at least a factor of 2 ... if not more because you can use thinner blades too.



Will be a non-issue once "innovative Canon" finally brings an FF sensor with global electronic shutter ... mirror-free, moving-mechanics-free. Hopefully soon.


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 1, 2018)

mb66energy said:


> [..]Just tried the EF 2.0 100 minutes ago with the M50 and it works very fast and without hunting -[..]



In theory DPAF can't hunt, after 2 measurements it can calculate how far away the subject is and move to that immediately. Apparently contrast AF can't do that.


----------



## mb66energy (Dec 1, 2018)

4fun said:


> @mb66energy ... yes. But I think that niche is extremely small.
> 
> 
> 
> Will be a non-issue once "innovative Canon" finally brings an FF sensor with global electronic shutter ... mirror-free, moving-mechanics-free. Hopefully soon.



That would be great especially for video: I always like the quality of the "old fashioned" real film movies from 191x to 2010 which had global shutter! Maybe stacked sensor design allows sometimes individual ADCs for small pixel groups which have a readout speed of 10 kHz and the digitized data were read out at 100 Hz and are very precise!


----------



## 4fun (Dec 1, 2018)

koenkooi said:


> In theory DPAF can't hunt, after 2 measurements it can calculate how far away the subject is and move to that immediately. Apparently contrast AF can't do that.



in practice it depends on camera *and* lens/AF drive. 

Plus, when there simply is too little contrast in a scene, any AF system can and will hunt before giving up.


----------



## bertzie (Dec 2, 2018)

4fun said:


> i still use the 1st gen original M. It has been on many mountains with me in all sorts of weather, summer and winter. Once it fell into deep snow and i accidentally skied over it. Dug it out, wiped it off and it just kept working without a problem, despite no official weather sealing. Still working well today after close to 50k clicks. Proudly wearing a few battle marks. Not bad for a cheap little toy.
> 
> An upcoming M5 successor might well be (slightly) bigger with a (somewhat) bigger grip, stronger battery, (even) tougher chassis, full weather sealing and a top-notch AF system. And Canon might call it "EOS M7". Are you ready for action, soccer moms, birders and outdoor sports afficionados?
> 
> *No need for an FF-sized, but only crop-sensored EOS R model.* EOS R is about FF ... all the way.



Ever seen the 7d series? Large, heavy, crop-sensor cameras. It gives you better balance and stability when you have large, heavy lenses on them. Throw an EOS-M body on a 400mm f/2.8 and it'll be very front-heavy and unwieldy.


----------



## Togorus (Dec 2, 2018)

I wonder... could it mean that Canon preps to phase out the DSLR line in a future...


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 2, 2018)

bertzie said:


> Ever seen the 7d series? Large, heavy, crop-sensor cameras. It gives you better balance and stability when you have large, heavy lenses on them. Throw an EOS-M body on a 400mm f/2.8 and it'll be very front-heavy and unwieldy.



Canon could release a large, heavy M camera roughly the size of the 7D with the sample build quality and weather sealing. The 7D is my main camera besides my M, so I would seriously consider buying that plus a grip.

If Canon goes that way, will it be built like a tank like a 7D or be a sturdy toy-like build quality like the 80D?


----------



## 4fun (Dec 2, 2018)

bertzie said:


> Ever seen the 7d series? Large, heavy, crop-sensor cameras. It gives you better balance and stability when you have large, heavy lenses on them. Throw an EOS-M body on a 400mm f/2.8 and it'll be very front-heavy and unwieldy.



People able to afford 10k+ lenses like EF 400/2.8 L wuill simply buy an upcoming high-end, hi-rez EOS R and use crop-mode when desired. As simple as that. 

PS: I had a 7D. Good camera, but too large for my use. Prefer EOS M + EF-M lenses.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 2, 2018)

koenkooi said:


> Canon could release a large, heavy M camera roughly the size of the 7D with the sample build quality and weather sealing.



I expect a new flagship EOS "M7", of course not nearly as large as a 7D body. Smaller than any EOS R, basically M5 size, just a bit chunkier grip for (hopefully) a LP-E6N power pack. Decent weather-sealing should really be no problem, if Pentax can do it on 399 cameras. A few O-rings and a bit of PU foam for less than a € in total are all it takes. Plus a top-notch AF system and some fully-blown DIGIC. 

Full match of Fuji X-T3 specs at same price ... €/$ 1499 ... all that's needed for Canon to immediately send entire xxD/7D mirrorslapper series into retirement.


----------



## johnhenry (Dec 2, 2018)

bertzie said:


> Ever seen the 7d series? Large, heavy, crop-sensor cameras. It gives you better balance and stability when you have large, heavy lenses on them. Throw an EOS-M body on a 400mm f/2.8 and it'll be very front-heavy and unwieldy.


I loved my 7D mk I

But the mk II was a vast disappointmen, so I went to a 6D mkII

Great balance with a 200mm f/1.8 on the front. Hand holdable


----------



## maniacalrobot (Dec 3, 2018)

about time! EOSM with a speed booster and the vast array of top quality EF lenses out makes this a superb platform for amateur hobbyists. Image an EOS-M5 with a 70-200L F4 + speedbooster :-0


----------



## maniacalrobot (Dec 3, 2018)

maniacalrobot said:


> about time! EOSM with a speed booster and the vast array of top quality EF lenses out makes this a superb platform for amateur hobbyists. Image an EOS-M5 with a 70-200L F4 + speedbooster :-0


or the nifty 50 F1.8?


----------



## 4fun (Dec 3, 2018)

maniacalrobot said:


> or the nifty 50 F1.8?



31/ somewhere between 1.2 and 1.4?
not good for EF-M 32/1.4 @ 500 € ...


----------



## bertzie (Dec 4, 2018)

4fun said:


> People able to afford 10k+ lenses like EF 400/2.8 L wuill simply buy an upcoming high-end, hi-rez EOS R and use crop-mode when desired. As simple as that.
> 
> PS: I had a 7D. Good camera, but too large for my use. Prefer EOS M + EF-M lenses.



See, this is where we disagree. I have a 7dmk2, and I love the larger size of it. It's much more solid and feels better in the hand. Plus if need be I could beat a man to death with it. I don't want a small camera, I want a big, heavy camera. But I can't afford the 1d series, so...


----------



## bertzie (Dec 4, 2018)

4fun said:


> I expect a new flagship EOS "M7", of course not nearly as large as a 7D body. Smaller than any EOS R, basically M5 size, just a bit chunkier grip for (hopefully) a LP-E6N power pack. Decent weather-sealing should really be no problem, if Pentax can do it on 399 cameras. A few O-rings and a bit of PU foam for less than a € in total are all it takes. Plus a top-notch AF system and some fully-blown DIGIC.
> 
> Full match of Fuji X-T3 specs at same price ... €/$ 1499 ... all that's needed for Canon to immediately send entire xxD/7D mirrorslapper series into retirement.



You have to consider the major design challenges with making a 7d series M camera. They would have to resign literally the entire camera from the ground up to meet the features available on the 7d just for that camera. If Canon is indeed comitted to making the switch from DSLR to mirrorless, they're going to need a 1d replacement. And many of the design features on a 1d easily translate to a 7d, greatly reducing engineering costs. 

Look at the design of the M series. The memory card slot is inside the battery compartment. You simply can't have that in a professional level camera, it makes using a battery grip impossible, and battery grips are an important accessory for many professional photographers. For an M platform 7d replacement, they'd have to redesign the processing system, and the memory system, and the power management system. Ignoring personal desires, from a fiscal standpoint, an R platform 7d replacement makes much more sense than an M series.


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 4, 2018)

bertzie said:


> [..]
> Look at the design of the M series. The memory card slot is inside the battery compartment. You simply can't have that in a professional level camera, it makes using a battery grip impossible, and battery grips are an important accessory for many professional photographers. For an M platform 7d replacement, they'd have to redesign the processing system, and the memory system, and the power management system. Ignoring personal desires, from a fiscal standpoint, an R platform 7d replacement makes much more sense than an M series.



The M10 and M100 have the SD card slot on the side and those are the lowest level in the M series. 

Anyway, if the M7 is a copy of the R, but with an M mount I'd be happy with that. Especially if it takes LP-E6 batteries


----------



## 4fun (Dec 4, 2018)

bertzie said:


> You have to consider the major design challenges with making a 7d series M camera. They would have to resign literally the entire camera from the ground up to meet the features available on the 7d just for that camera.



"Major design challenges" ... LOL. A mirrorfree "EOS M7" far superior to 7D II would not be very difficult. 

Start from EOS M5
* put new top-notch 28 MP DP-AF sensor in [100 $] 
* put better DIGIC and 64 GB fast buffer memory in [100 $]
* put top-notch AF system in for full Servo tracking @11 fps, also in focus priority [50 $]
* put lag-free "4k retina" EVF in [50 $]
* make grip a little bit chunkier [1 $] 
* stick a regular LP-E6N battery into it [0 extra cost] 
* put 2 UHS-III SD card slots in [5 $]
* add a few O-rings, gaskets and foam behind doors, wheels and buttons for decent weathersealing [1 $] 
done. 

Vertical grip? Canon just needs to follow innovative Fuji's approach. No significant R&D expense involved. Much smarter design. Rather than a stupid connector "sticking into camera battery slot" a 2 battery grip working in combo with battery in camera = 3 batteries total. Plus even chunkier grip for those who like it big. No big deal really. And still smaller than any EOS R mount camera. 









> If you want a lot more battery power there's always the optional VG-XT3 battery grip. With the grip attached the X-T3 has _three_ batteries, providing almost 1200 shots per charge. Fujifilm has designed the grip in such a way that the camera will switch between batteries seamlessly, so videos and continuous bursts are not interrupted.


https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t3/3

... and where is "innovative Canon"?


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 4, 2018)

4fun said:


> "Major design challenges" ... LOL. A mirrorfree "EOS M7" far superior to 7D II would not be very difficult.
> 
> Start from EOS M5
> * put new top-notch 28 MP DP-AF sensor in [100 $]
> ...



You mean a grip like this?


----------



## 4fun (Dec 4, 2018)

koenkooi said:


> You mean a grip like this?



no. I do NOT mean one of Canon's idiotic WFT WiFi bricks. 

I mean a smart design like the Fuji one. Or what Nikon did with D700 ... a vertical grip that could take either 2 regular batteries or 1 powerful large [D3] battery. Never understood why Canon did not design grip for 7D II that could either take 2x LP-E6N or 1x 1D-X II battery. Simply stupid, Canon.


----------



## Alastair Norcross (Dec 4, 2018)

johnhenry said:


> I loved my 7D mk I
> 
> But the mk II was a vast disappointmen, so I went to a 6D mkII
> 
> Great balance with a 200mm f/1.8 on the front. Hand holdable


Weird. I, too, loved my 7D mkI, but I love my 7DII much more. The upgrade from the 7D to the 7DII is the largest single upgrade in Canon history. Every single thing about the 7DII improves on the 7D. I can't imagine how anyone could have been even a little disapppointed in the upgrade (it was worth it for the amazing pro-grade AF alone), let alone thinking it a "vast disappointment". Did you own, or even handle the 7DII? There is still no other APS-C camera, Canon or otherwise, I would trade for it. It's a joy to use, and produces amazing results, more than four years after I bought it.


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 5, 2018)

Alastair Norcross said:


> Weird. I, too, loved my 7D mkI, but I love my 7DII much more. The upgrade from the 7D to the 7DII is the largest single upgrade in Canon history. Every single thing about the 7DII improves on the 7D. I can't imagine how anyone could have been even a little disapppointed in the upgrade (it was worth it for the amazing pro-grade AF alone), let alone thinking it a "vast disappointment". Did you own, or even handle the 7DII? There is still no other APS-C camera, Canon or otherwise, I would trade for it. It's a joy to use, and produces amazing results, more than four years after I bought it.



During the first year of the 7D2 launch there were a lot of reports of people not getting sharp pictures in any situation. Sending it in for repair mostly fixed it. To me that sounds like Canon had a manufacturing defect and didn't want to issue a recall. 
Another large portion of the "I don't like it" comments had to do with the combination of larger AF spread and it picking the closest thing to focus on.
In the end I didn't buy a 7D2 because it lacked a touchscreen and my 7D1 still worked very well for me. The M1 showed me how useful that is in menus, picture review and the 'Q' menu.


----------



## Quirkz (Dec 5, 2018)

4fun said:


> Full match of Fuji X-T3 specs at same price ... €/$ 1499 ... all that's needed for Canon to immediately send entire xxD/7D mirrorslapper series into retirement.



The 80D has a $1199 launch price. 1500 is probably a tad too high.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 5, 2018)

Quirkz said:


> The 80D has a $1199 launch price. 1500 is probably a tad too high.



I'd gladly accept a lower price too. 
However, Fuji XT-3 is well ahead of 80D functionality, capability and build. A "mirrorfree 7D III" should not come with lower specs.


----------



## bertzie (Dec 6, 2018)

koenkooi said:


> The M10 and M100 have the SD card slot on the side and those are the lowest level in the M series.
> 
> Anyway, if the M7 is a copy of the R, but with an M mount I'd be happy with that. Especially if it takes LP-E6 batteries



Why would you want it to be an M mount to begin with? There is very little M glass available, and none of it is L series equivalent.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 6, 2018)

bertzie said:


> Why would you want it to be an M mount to begin with? There is very little M glass available, and none of it is L series equivalent.



because EOS M is Canon's product category with APS-C sensor. It has really right mount, size, weight, bulk and price for APS-C.In addition to EF-M lenses which are all good to excellent and cover the entire relevant focal length with crop size advantage, all EF/EF-S lenses, including L glass are fully functional on any EOS M camera via a simple little extension tube adapter.

future EOS M models can easily be designed to surpass, succeed and replace entire xxD and 7D series mirrorslappers.

No need whatsoever for APS-C sensors in EOS R series. R mount and EOS R product line is all about FF image circle.

Different weight classes, as in boxing sport. APS-C sensor in EOS R body would be like a bantam-weight guy wearing heavyweight boxer shorts going into heavyweight fights.


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 6, 2018)

bertzie said:


> Why would you want it to be an M mount to begin with? There is very little M glass available, and none of it is L series equivalent.



Aside from the 18-150 I have all the EF-M lenses Canon released and I don't mind the EF adapter. But I think we're slightly misunderstanding eachother: I don't _actively_ want a mirrorless 7D with EF-M mount, but I would be very happy buying it. 
What I am actively wishing for is an M6II with EOS firmware, like the M50 has, and an R with 50+ MP.


----------



## bertzie (Dec 6, 2018)

4fun said:


> because EOS M is Canon's product category with APS-C sensor. It has really right mount, size, weight, bulk and price for APS-C.In addition to EF-M lenses which are all good to excellent and cover the entire relevant focal length with crop size advantage, all EF/EF-S lenses, including L glass are fully functional on any EOS M camera via a simple little extension tube adapter.
> 
> future EOS M models can easily be designed to surpass, succeed and replace entire xxD and 7D series mirrorslappers.
> 
> ...



The 7d series aint no bantam-weight. It's a heavyweight performer that needs a heavyweight body to match. The fact that you keep lumping it in with the xxD series makes me question whether you really understand the purpose of the 7d series.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 6, 2018)

bertzie said:


> The 7d series aint no bantam-weight. It's a heavyweight performer that needs a heavyweight body to match. The fact that you keep lumping it in with the xxD series makes me question whether you really understand the purpose of the 7d series.



1) I've had a 7D myself. 

2.) ok, how about 
xxxxD = light flyweight
xxxD = flyweight
xxD = bantamweight
7D = welterweight
happier now? 

My definition of (digital) cameras rests on *size of sensor surface*, not on weight of camera body, because the latter is to a large degree arbitrary. To me no crop-sensor cameras is ever "heavweight". 

3) A new "flagship" EOS M could easily be made with a slightly chunkier grip to house a larger battery (ideally LP-E6N), sturdy and fully weathersealed body, top-notch AF and fps, and with an (optional) vertical grip to yield a package far superior to any mirrored 7D III but yet more compact and less expensive than a EOS camera R camera. 

"EOS M7" could be sized anywhere between EOS M5 and EOS R. If Canon makes it as big as Fuji X-T3, they might as well go with EOS R body. ;-) 
I'd prefer and expect it "as compact as possible" = only slightly larger (grip) than EOS M5. 







4) I expect FF EOS R bodies to start around USD/€ 1500 in future. That leaves price range between 1000 and 1499 open for "high-capability crop sensor EOS M camera/s. To get an idea, just look at Fuji XT-3. It is 1499 MSRP, (smart!) optional grip available (for a total of 3 batteries) and it runs circles around 7D II.


----------



## 4fun (Dec 6, 2018)

koenkooi said:


> Aside from the 18-150 I have all the EF-M lenses Canon released and I don't mind the EF adapter. But I think we're slightly misunderstanding eachother: I don't _actively_ want a mirrorless 7D with EF-M mount, but I would be very happy buying it.
> What I am actively wishing for is an M6II with EOS firmware, like the M50 has, and an R with 50+ MP.



I would like "the most compact possible" EOS R. Then I could finally consolidate from 2 systems [APS-C plus FF] to 1 system only [FF].


----------



## bertzie (Dec 6, 2018)

4fun said:


> 1) I've had a 7D myself.
> 
> 2.) ok, how about
> xxxxD = light flyweight
> ...



Are you willing to sacrifice performance to get a more compact body? because I sure as hell am not, and making it much smaller would mean sacrificing features. Can you fit dual card slots in an M sized body? Probably not. That was a major complaint about the EOS-R, and I can't see them sacrificing it for a 7d replacement after having implemented it in the 7dmk2. Size wise, the 7d series and the 5d series have always been very comparable. In any given dimension they're only 2-4mm differenc between them; which again I don't see them changing as they switch to mirrorless. I also like the fact that I could beat a man to death with my 7dmk2 should the need ever arise. 

I'm honestly very skeptical as to whether an M sized body could properly handle the heat from a dual processor camera, and dropping to a single processor would be a major blow to performance.


----------



## AlanF (Dec 6, 2018)

bertzie said:


> The 7d series aint no bantam-weight. It's a heavyweight performer that needs a heavyweight body to match. The fact that you keep lumping it in with the xxD series makes me question whether you really understand the purpose of the 7d series.



You are absolutely right. The 7D series is used by birders and nature photographers who need a big body with deep grip and strong frame to take large telephoto lenses.


----------



## Bangrossi (Dec 6, 2018)

Yesterday, I bought viltrox speed booster efm to ef. Today, I returned it. Yes it do increase lens aperture by 1 stop and make the lens field of view wider. But:

I can notice an IQ loss across all of my lenses. AF speed slower than canon original ef adapter

35mm f1.4 II
AF always back focus with the lens and a lot of color fringing. Image quality loss is very noticeable with this lens.

16-35mm f2.8 III
AF work fine just with 16-35mm III. IQ sllightly worst compared toefm 11-22mm.

50mm L and 85mm f1.2
The lens af motor work just fine but never achieve focus and cannot go wider than f1.0.

The 200mm f2 work just fine.

Build quality is very cheap. The build quality diffrence compared to original canon ef adapter is huge. The lens mount is plastic and wobly.

I hope canon make the speed bosster available soon. My advice is, stay away from this viltrox speed booster for eos m


----------



## 4fun (Dec 6, 2018)

Bangrossi said:


> The lens mount is plastic and wobly.



ouch! 

Is it the new Viltrox EF/EOS *M2 *adapter? 

you may want to post this also in the separate thread on Viltrox "speedbooster" adapter. -> https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...r-x0-71-for-ef-lenses-on-eos-m-with-af.36329/


----------



## funkboy (Dec 9, 2018)

I've already been looking at picking up a 2nd-hand EOS M6, now that there are good/cheap Fotodiox EF AF adapters for it.
I would certainly buy a high-quality "speed booster" without hesitation.


----------

