Compact DSLR-like Camera

[bongEstrella]

Hi Canoners,

I'm sure you've all heard about Panasonic's and Olympus' micro four thirds camera. I was fortunate enough to try the Olympus E-PL1 for a few days and the image quality blew me away, for such a small camera of course. My question is, what are your thoughts on Canon making it's own line of compact cameras with interchangeable lenses that deliver dslr-like image quality? I know they already have the G11 and s90 but let's face it, those are very good on good light but the image quality suffers rather quickly when it gets dimmer (no offense meant to users who love their G11s and S90s). So if Canon makes this type of camera, which is compatible to their current lineup of lenses, do you think there is a market for it?

Thanks!

[ken_vs_ryu]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5/ZCOMPT2I-FRONT-S.JPG

canon needs to compete with this sony. aps-c sensor, no mirror, and interchangeable lenses.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5/NEX5A.HTM

[toxic]

So if Canon makes this type of camera, which is compatible to their current lineup of lenses, do you think there is a market for it?

No one wants a camera the size of a wallet to have to use lenses that are twice the size. Do you want a 17-55 on a G11?

EOS lenses are designed for phase-detect AF and a mirror. A mirrorless design inherently requires a new line of lenses to make use of its advantages. This is probably why Canon and Nikon have yet to enter the mirrorless interchangeable lens market - they are still developing the lenses, as well as the bodies, all on top of their SLR and P&S lines.

[watt100]

No one wants a camera the size of a wallet to have to use lenses that are twice the size. Do you want a 17-55 on a G11?


I would like a small compact camera with an APS-C size sensor that would accept Canon lens. If it came with one of those "pancake" style lens that would be great for parties. I'll put a word in with the Canon engineers, hopefully they will get the research ball rolling.

[toxic]

I would like a small compact camera with an APS-C size sensor that would accept Canon lens. If it came with one of those "pancake" style lens that would be great for parties. I'll put a word in with the Canon engineers, hopefully they will get the research ball rolling.

Of course it would accept a Canon lens...it just won't be an EOS mount lens. It is simply not possible to make a pancake EOS lens for a mirrorless design.

The flange-to-focal plane (aka register) distance for mirrorless designs are around 20mm (18mm for E-mount, ~20 for m4/3). The register distance for EOS mount is 44mm. This necessitates an adapter of 20mm+ (nearly an inch) to use an EOS lens on a mirrorless design, so a pancake isn't possible since the adapter would be the size of a pancake lens.

Canon could make a camera with a larger register distance, but that means making a thicker camera and possibly having to use retrofocus design for wide-angle lenses, which defeats two of the biggest advantages of a mirrorless design.

[bongEstrella]

damn toxic, how do you know these things lols..

anyways, i guess it was just wishful thinking on my part. id be the first one to spring on it if ever canon decides to make one. i was actually thinking of mounting a prime lens on it if ever, so it should be reasonably compact. i did not, however, consider the physical design on how Canon is going to implement it. but still, it should be interesting.

[Anh Richie]

it'll be great if canon does get into this market i would surely grab one as soon it is available. I'm guessing if canon is developing some right now, they'll announce it maybe early next year and be available early spring or summer of next year. but the sooner the better i really hope they do make some to compete with the new sony NEX series. (fingers cross)

[Jericobot]

that's if they want to compete with the new sony NEX series. I, for one, wouldnt be on the market for a camera as the such, a slim point and shoot to me should be just that, slim

[CanonGarcon]

I would like a small compact camera with an APS-C size sensor that would accept Canon lens. If it came with one of those "pancake" style lens that would be great for parties. I'll put a word in with the Canon engineers, hopefully they will get the research ball rolling.


I also would like a Rolls Royce, a mansion on Miami Beach, and a supermodel as a wife. Doesn't mean I will get them.:rolleyes:

Want a compact camera, get a point and shoot.

Real men don't use mirrorless cameras.

[ingraman]

I think this is the wave of the future, and Canon will jump in when the time is right. DSLRs aren't designed as efficiently as they can be, mostly because of all the junk inside them. Minimize all that stuff, and you can design something much lighter and ergonomic. In fact, the grip on that Sony compact looks much more comfortable than the one on the T1i, probably because adding a wider grip on the Canon would increase the weight by half a pound. We're not at the point where these compacts can replace a DSLR, but I wouldn't be surprised if we see some big changes to DSLR bodies in the future.

[Genome]

before these things really take off there are certain brick wall issues they need to fix first. For a start when in burst mode and the screens dont keep showing the action. Instead they are either showing a preview or are black making it stupidly anoying to track anything. Secondly is the continuous focus speed. Pretty slow on these camera at the mo. The slow down in low light also is a huge issue.

When they fix these issues (and im sure they will eventually) then they might start to creep into the DSLR's territory. As they stand they are a bridge between P&S and DSLR.... which is fine.

[drocpsu]

No one wants a camera the size of a wallet to have to use lenses that are twice the size. Do you want a 17-55 on a G11?
These cameras seem interesting to me, but this is the biggest thing that I can't get over. With such a small camera body, who would want to put big lenses like this on it? this only isn't even that big compared to many others! Many of the often used Canon lenses would be WAY larger than the camera itself. I'd think that would just be awkward and uncomfortable. A larger body helps balance out the lens and body size/weight distribution when you're holding it and provides a good, solid, large grip.

These little mirrorless cameras only seem useful to me if you're using pancake lenses, which seems pretty limiting to me and causes you to lose most of the benefits of having a wide range of interchangeable lenses of different focal lengths & qualities. I haven't tried out any of the cameras yet, but do they have the typical shutter lag found on most point and shoots? If so, this would also be a huge detractor.

[ecub]

Wow, imagine a camera, about the size of a deck of playing cards, with a 70-200 mk2 or even a 1200mm lens?

[CanonGarcon]

I think this is the wave of the future, and Canon will jump in when the time is right. DSLRs aren't designed as efficiently as they can be, mostly because of all the junk inside them. Minimize all that stuff, and you can design something much lighter and ergonomic. In fact, the grip on that Sony compact looks much more comfortable than the one on the T1i, probably because adding a wider grip on the Canon would increase the weight by half a pound. We're not at the point where these compacts can replace a DSLR, but I wouldn't be surprised if we see some big changes to DSLR bodies in the future.

We will see how comfortable that grip on the Sony feels when attached to a 24-70mm 2.8 lens or a 70-200mm 2.8 lens.

[bongEstrella]

We will see how comfortable that grip on the Sony feels when attached to a 24-70mm 2.8 lens or a 70-200mm 2.8 lens.

or a pancake lens..

i think what most folks here forget is that you dont have to use a large lens with a small camera, it's just another option.

[tkbslc]

Wow, imagine a camera, about the size of a deck of playing cards, with a 70-200 mk2 or even a 1200mm lens?

You don't have to imagine, the four-thirds group make a cool app for us.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/products/matching/index.html

You can see what any 4/3 or m4/3 lens looks like on any camera body. Just for fun, go pick the GF1 or ELP1 and then strap a Zuiko 35-100 f2 on there. Or the 90-250 f2.8. Looks very functional. Remember there is only a LCD for composing so good luck holding it strait while your arms are outstretched so you can look at the screen!

Aside from those ridiculous setups, you can also put normal lenses on there. Even a regular 4/3 kit lens makes the GF1 about the same size as a regular SLR.

[CanonGarcon]

or a pancake lens..

i think what most folks here forget is that you dont have to use a large lens with a small camera, it's just another option.


Those pancake lenses are of limited use. They don't extend very long on the tele lens. They don't have small aperatures.

[CanonGarcon]

damn toxic, how do you know these things lols..

anyways, i guess it was just wishful thinking on my part. id be the first one to spring on it if ever canon decides to make one. i was actually thinking of mounting a prime lens on it if ever, so it should be reasonably compact. i did not, however, consider the physical design on how Canon is going to implement it. but still, it should be interesting.

Could it be that Toxic knows what he is talking about and lives in the real world?

[bongEstrella]

Those pancake lenses are of limited use. They don't extend very long on the tele lens. They don't have small aperatures.

maybe to you, but to some people no. not all of us need tele lenses :wink: again, you're talking as if you should either use a pancake lens or a big lens. if im carrying a bunch of big lenses and dslrs, i dont think it's gonna hurt if i bring another compact camera that i might be able to use on my other lenses. again, i dont have to use it, its just another option. not trying to convince you, but to me, it makes sense.

Could it be that Toxic knows what he is talking about and lives in the real world?

ive heard this before from the sony camp, then bam! comes nex3/5.

[CanonGarcon]

maybe to you, but to some people no. not all of us need tele lenses :wink: again, you're talking as if you should either use a pancake lens or a big lens. if im carrying a bunch of big lenses and dslrs, i dont think it's gonna hurt if i bring another compact camera that i might be able to use on my other lenses. again, i dont have to use it, its just another option. not trying to convince you, but to me, it makes sense.



ive heard this before from the sony camp, then bam! comes nex3/5.

The lens mount on Canons are larger in diameter than the lens mount on Sony/Minolta SLRs. Canon will need a larger mirrorless camera to handle the size of the EF mount.

Lots of people use tele lenses or need the reach of a zoom.

[tkbslc]

I would bet that rather than compromising the usefulness of the new mount, they would utilize adapters. Much like m4/3 and Sony NEX have done.

[bongEstrella]

The lens mount on Canons are larger in diameter than the lens mount on Sony/Minolta SLRs. Canon will need a larger mirrorless camera to handle the size of the EF mount.

i guess that's my fault, im trying to compare canon's mount to that of sony's. theyre different systems yes. it's gonna be a challenge for canon engineers, but when (or if?) they pull it off, its gonna be a hit!

Lots of people use tele lenses or need the reach of a zoom.

thats the keyword, not all.

[nekrosoft13]

So if Canon makes this type of camera, which is compatible to their current lineup of lenses, do you think there is a market for it?

Thanks!

that won't happen, the four thirds camera use smaller lenses

[tkbslc]

Could it be that Toxic knows what he is talking about and lives in the real world?

So, mr. realist, should Canon ever come out with a new camera of any kind? It seems like you think none of us should ask for, discuss, or wish for any progress in camera systems.

[CanonGarcon]

i guess that's my fault, im trying to compare canon's mount to that of sony's. theyre different systems yes. it's gonna be a challenge for canon engineers, but when (or if?) they pull it off, its gonna be a hit!



thats the keyword, not all.

So, mr. realist, should Canon ever come out with a new camera of any kind? It seems like you think none of us should ask for, discuss, or wish for any progress in camera systems.

We are just telling what is realistic with today's technology.

[CanonGarcon]

i guess that's my fault, im trying to compare canon's mount to that of sony's. theyre different systems yes. it's gonna be a challenge for canon engineers, but when (or if?) they pull it off, its gonna be a hit!



thats the keyword, not all.

Lots and most is what companies pay attention too. They can't pay attention to every Tom, Harry, and Sally. Most people want a camera that has quite of an extensive zoom, especially on the long end.

These so called EVIL cameras are not the future. You are not going to be seeing people shooting sporting events with a camera the size of a deck of cards attached to monsterous lenses while trying to compose a picture holding a camera a foot from their face. By the time they compose their picture, what they wanted to take a photo of is gone.

[elfenix]

We will see how comfortable that grip on the Sony feels when attached to a 24-70mm 2.8 lens or a 70-200mm 2.8 lens.

i don't know why holding the lens rather than the body is such a difficult concept. i already do it with SLRs.


Of course it would accept a Canon lens...it just won't be an EOS mount lens. It is simply not possible to make a pancake EOS lens for a mirrorless design.

The flange-to-focal plane (aka register) distance for mirrorless designs are around 20mm (18mm for E-mount, ~20 for m4/3). The register distance for EOS mount is 44mm. This necessitates an adapter of 20mm+ (nearly an inch) to use an EOS lens on a mirrorless design, so a pancake isn't possible since the adapter would be the size of a pancake lens.

Canon could make a camera with a larger register distance, but that means making a thicker camera and possibly having to use retrofocus design for wide-angle lenses, which defeats two of the biggest advantages of a mirrorless design.

isn't a retrofocal design necessary to push the exit aperture away from the sensor to combat the angle of incidence issue? i suppose leica dealt with it in software for the M9. maybe the whole thing was just overblown by olmypus when designing 4/3 anyway.

[Tom W]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5/ZCOMPT2I-FRONT-S.JPG

canon needs to compete with this sony. aps-c sensor, no mirror, and interchangeable lenses.


And, no viewfinder, ugly, not enough area to grip, nose-heavy with that lens.

No thanks - Compete with something practical, not goofy.

[Tom W]

Those pancake lenses are of limited use. They don't extend very long on the tele lens. They don't have small aperatures.

The Olympus 17 mm f/2.8 pancake lens stops down to f/22. Is that small enough?

[Tom W]

These cameras seem interesting to me, but this is the biggest thing that I can't get over. With such a small camera body, who would want to put big lenses like this on it? this only isn't even that big compared to many others! Many of the often used Canon lenses would be WAY larger than the camera itself. I'd think that would just be awkward and uncomfortable. A larger body helps balance out the lens and body size/weight distribution when you're holding it and provides a good, solid, large grip.

These little mirrorless cameras only seem useful to me if you're using pancake lenses, which seems pretty limiting to me and causes you to lose most of the benefits of having a wide range of interchangeable lenses of different focal lengths & qualities. I haven't tried out any of the cameras yet, but do they have the typical shutter lag found on most point and shoots? If so, this would also be a huge detractor.

The way Olympus (and others) do it is that they make a few small "pancake" lenses designed specifically for the mirrorless body, with very short backfocus distance designs. They also offer an adapter so that their regular line of lenses can be used with the mirrorless body. That's the best way I can think of to do it.

[CanonGarcon]

And, no viewfinder, ugly, not enough area to grip, nose-heavy with that lens.

No thanks - Compete with something practical, not goofy.

You are correct, sir.

Something else that doesn't get mentioned is that Sony moves it's anti-shake (IS) to the lens from the body for their mirrorless camera. That means no IS, OS, AS, or what else you would call it for any traditional Sony/Minolta SLR lens attached to this camera.

[CanonGarcon]

i don't know why holding the lens rather than the body is such a difficult concept. i already do it with SLRs.




Holding a camera by just it's lens results in a lot more camera shake, it's not a very stable way to hold a camera and most people don't do it.

[toxic]

isn't a retrofocal design necessary to push the exit aperture away from the sensor to combat the angle of incidence issue? i suppose leica dealt with it in software for the M9. maybe the whole thing was just overblown by olmypus when designing 4/3 anyway.

Not sure what you mean by "angle of incidence issue"...exposing the sensor uniformly?

Retrofocal design is needed because a wide-angle lens would normally have its rear element very close to the sensor, but you can't do that in an SLR because of the mirror. In mirrorless designs...there is no mirror.

That's one of the advantages of rangefinders over SLRs - no retrofocal wide-angle lenses means superior IQ and smaller lenses.

These so called EVIL cameras are not the future. You are not going to be seeing people shooting sporting events with a camera the size of a deck of cards attached to monsterous lenses while trying to compose a picture holding a camera a foot from their face. By the time they compose their picture, what they wanted to take a photo of is gone.

No one said these designs would replace current SLRs. They are compact, large sensor cameras. You get the IQ but not the response and a TTL view. That's the tradeoff.

Saying they have no place is like saying rangefinders have no place in photography.

[Tom W]

Not sure what you mean by "angle of incidence issue"...exposing the sensor uniformly?

Retrofocal design is needed because a wide-angle lens would normally have its rear element very close to the sensor, but you can't do that in an SLR because of the mirror. In mirrorless designs...there is no mirror.

That's one of the advantages of rangefinders over SLRs - no retrofocal wide-angle lenses means superior IQ and smaller lenses.

Very true. Think about this - a 16 mm wide-angle lens has a focal length that is shorter than the distance from the sensor to the lens mount. You basically have to take the ultrawide lens and then add a retrofocus lens to focus the image on the sensor. Shortening the distance between the mount and the sensor would drastically decrease the required strength of the retrofocus lens group.

No one said these designs would replace current SLRs. They are compact, large sensor cameras. You get the IQ but not the response and a TTL view. That's the tradeoff.

Saying they have no place is like saying rangefinders have no place in photography.

I think that electronic viewfinders are going to be very good soon - perhaps not quite as good as pure optics, but they will soon have the response speed and resolution necessary for a lot of photography work.

The other issue with a mirrorless system is AF - contrast-detection AF speed is very slow compared to the phase-detection system used on nearly all DSLR bodies. But the phase-detection system uses the mirror and a separate dedicated sensor array for autofocus. It's built solely for that purpose. If that speed and sensitivity can be duplicated in a mirrorless body, it changes everything!

[canonboy]

Having actually used the Nex i would seriously say as a walk about, the camera with the 16mm pancake is truly a stunning camera for the price (where i live its £340 for the nex 3 with pancake)! it's nice and fast! okay okay yes if you use sony/minolta lenses you get no auto focus or IS but ffs this is not aimed at a market wanting to sport a 500mm lens.

What it is....FAST and i mean reaaaaaally fast! Good quality pictures without shelling out SLR prices, practical size for those who just cba to take out there SLR on a nice sunny day down the boardwalk. Easy menu system actually sums it up. its for people who dont want to get the most out of there camera and just point and shoot on Auto all day long.

Seriously i would love for canon to make a nex equivilant, you have to remember not everybody in the world is in our market of wanting top notch full 5D :)

[elfenix]

Not sure what you mean by "angle of incidence issue"...exposing the sensor uniformly?


yes, as microlenses can only deal with light coming in from certain angles. olympus specified the exit pupil further away from the sensor plane than standard film designs did (or at least would have had the film been that size, 110) in order to deal with it (iirc they went too far as even contemporary sensors didn't have microlenses as bad, for lack of a better term, as what olympus planned for).



Holding a camera by just it's lens results in a lot more camera shake, it's not a very stable way to hold a camera and most people don't do it.
i'm not sure how holding something under the center of gravity (the lens for any large lens, or at the mount for smaller lenses) is worse than holding on a polar end and exerting rotational forces (the grip)