Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 07 Feb 2015 (Saturday) 17:03
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

eosm, why not an ef mount instead

 
burb1972
Member
126 posts
Joined Aug 2013
     
Feb 07, 2015 17:03 |  #1

Why not go with an ef mount, automatically they would have tons of lenses, not have to engineer a new mount and new lenses. And size wise its not that much bigger.


mike parker
gear list 5dc, tamron 19-35, tamron 28-75, 50mm 1.8 mark 1, 28-70 3.5 canon(x2), 100 f/2 canon, 70-300 usm is, helios 44-2, vpk lens put into a m42 cap attached to a bellows, 430 ex

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Overread
Goldmember
Avatar
2,198 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 38
Joined Mar 2010
     
Feb 07, 2015 17:22 |  #2

burb1972 wrote in post #17420635 (external link)
Why not go with an ef mount, automatically they would have tons of lenses

And that's possibly one of the core reasons.
If you view the mirrorless range as supporting rather than replacing the DSLR lines (many photographers buy a mirrorless to be their "light" camera alongside their DSLR) then it makes sense that you want to take as big a slice of that pie as possible. Thus if you release a different mount system you ensure that your system won't let you down. You'll get the similar profits the other brands get even from your own dedicated fan-base of established Canon photographers.
By releasing a new mount all customers have to purchase both camera and lens(es). It won't lose you much because if they don't go for your product then they have to buy into a 3rd part and get new lenses anyway; so you lose nothing and gain increased sales.

There might also be design choices on the mount size of the EF mount that meant that the new mount is superior (smaller/thinner) to thus best match it to the overall smaller camera size. It might also be due to the flange distance that is expected/used with EF/EFS mounts which could complicate downsizing the system to a smaller body overall (ergo the lenses would have required a deeper camera body and thus you lose on width - remember a DSLR is quite deep compared to a mirrorless camera. Thus there could be a purely practical reason for the choice (ergo not all economic).


Tools of the trade: Canon 400D, Canon 7D, Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS L M2, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS, Canon MPE 65mm f2.8 macro, Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro, Tamron 24-70mm f2.4, Sigma 70mm f2.8 macro, Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6, Raynox DCR 250, loads of teleconverters and a flashy thingy too
My flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
burb1972
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
126 posts
Joined Aug 2013
     
Feb 07, 2015 17:45 |  #3

the sl1 is slightly thicker. it just seems it would be a much better system if it was an ef mount given the limited amount of eosm lenses. once you add the adaptor its almost as big as a sl1. And if it was a better system, would canon care if it sold a t3i vs 2 eosm's.? I think a really good eosm would sell better than a T3i(viewfinder vs size, size would win in sales). It seems if it was smaller than an dslr and better than the competition( due to lens selection) it would be a gateway camera, leading more people to get stuck with canon.Plus now the ff cameras are coming down in price. I got my cherry 5dc for 500$ over a year ago. However, very valid points on previous post.


mike parker
gear list 5dc, tamron 19-35, tamron 28-75, 50mm 1.8 mark 1, 28-70 3.5 canon(x2), 100 f/2 canon, 70-300 usm is, helios 44-2, vpk lens put into a m42 cap attached to a bellows, 430 ex

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Feb 07, 2015 18:23 |  #4

The smaller mount also allows having smaller lenses, making the all package much smaller than regular DSLRs.


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,080 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Feb 07, 2015 19:05 |  #5

Canon makes an ef/efs adapter as well. Pretty cheap too.


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Petie53
Senior Member
373 posts
Likes: 95
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 07, 2015 19:22 |  #6

I have both the M and some EF series cameras. As I understand it - could be wrong - as the M has no mirror, the lens can be designed with the rear element at about the same position as the rear connector as no room needs to be provided to clear the mirror movement and the mount itself is much closer to the sensor. The EF and EF-S lenses are designed to allow the image to correctly hit the sensor with additional clearance to clear the mirror. This is why the M to EF adapter is used to give the required spacing that M lenses don't need.


Pete
6D, 60D, EOS-M, EOS-M3, 22M, 11-22M, 18-55M, 55-200M, 15L 2.8 fisheye, 10-22 EFS, 35 F/2 IS USM, 18-135 STM, 24-70L 2.8 II, 70-300L, 100-400L II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,011 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1623
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Feb 07, 2015 20:13 |  #7

As others have said it is much easier to make small light short focal length lenses when you have a smaller flange to sensor distance. This is because you do not need to make the lens design retrofocus, which tends to make for bigger lenses. Thats before you allow for EF lenses that have to accommodate a 35×24mm image circle coverage. So your mirrorless with standard and wide lenses will be much smaller. This is also the same for traditional 35mm rangefinder cameras though. Just look at the size of say a 35mm lens for Leica compared to a 35mm for any SLR. I have a 35mm Olympus XA2 with a 35mm f/4 (I think) fixed lens, and the whole thing is the size of a 20 pack of cigarettes. It's a pretty tiny front element too considering, just because it can be close to the film plane.

On the other hand it is useful to Canon to be able to have a fully matched adaptor that can allow telephoto lenses to be used using the EF mount. Even in the EF-s mount you will notice that the longest lens in an EF-s mount is the 55-250 (for this the wide end focal length is important) from 70mm upwards there is no benefit in the lens design from using the smaller imaging circle. The physical size of the lens is pretty much dependant on the focal length and maximum aperture. A 70-200 f/4 still needs a needs a 50mm front element, a f/2.8 71mm. The lenger it gets the worse it gets so 400mm f/2.8 will need 142mm at the front as will the 800 f/5.6, the 600 f/4 gets to 150mm. If you are going to use any of those on your mirrorless there is no size advantage to be gained. At least you get a Canon designed adaptor to let them work as well as any other lens.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,354 posts
Gallery: 1718 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10828
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
Post edited over 4 years ago by MalVeauX.
     
Feb 08, 2015 15:23 |  #8

burb1972 wrote in post #17420635 (external link)
Why not go with an ef mount, automatically they would have tons of lenses, not have to engineer a new mount and new lenses. And size wise its not that much bigger.

Heya,

No mirror box. Means less physical space needed. That brings the lens closer to the sensor. That means it has to be a different size and different mount. The EF & EF-S mount are built around a mirror box, and have to be a certain distance from the sensor. The M could not have had the EF/EF-S mount natively unless they physically made the EOS-M as thick physically as a mirror-box'd SLR, which totally defeats the purpose of making it mirrorless.

The adapter is the answer, as it does give access to the entire EF/EF-S line. And more. And you don't have to end up with a big giant "mirrorless" camera at all times, unless you just want to.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,479 posts
Gallery: 84 photos
Likes: 975
Joined Oct 2014
     
Feb 08, 2015 20:29 |  #9

burb1972 wrote in post #17420675 (external link)
the sl1 is slightly thicker. it just seems it would be a much better system if it was an ef mount given the limited amount of eosm lenses. once you add the adaptor its almost as big as a sl1. And if it was a better system, would canon care if it sold a t3i vs 2 eosm's.? I think a really good eosm would sell better than a T3i(viewfinder vs size, size would win in sales). It seems if it was smaller than an dslr and better than the competition( due to lens selection) it would be a gateway camera, leading more people to get stuck with canon.Plus now the ff cameras are coming down in price. I got my cherry 5dc for 500$ over a year ago. However, very valid points on previous post.

That, ultimately, is why I got an SL1. With the M, you're stuck with a handful (even worse here in the US) of lenses, and if you "jut add the adapter", you might as well have the SL1, with its faster AF and the satisfying *chunk* of a shutter.


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/127590681@N03/ (external link)
I love a like, but feedback (including CC) is even better!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,011 posts
Gallery: 543 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1623
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Feb 09, 2015 04:58 |  #10

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17422733 (external link)
That, ultimately, is why I got an SL1. With the M, you're stuck with a handful (even worse here in the US) of lenses, and if you "jut add the adapter", you might as well have the SL1, with its faster AF and the satisfying *chunk* of a shutter.

But that satisfying clunk is not the shutter it is the mirror. Most of the mirrorless bodies still have a mechanical focal plain shutter for still exposures, as they work better. So they have to close the shutter, flush the charge from the sensor then expose. The same happens for stills on a DSLR when using LV.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,479 posts
Gallery: 84 photos
Likes: 975
Joined Oct 2014
     
Feb 09, 2015 06:46 |  #11

BigAl007 wrote in post #17423212 (external link)
But that satisfying clunk is not the shutter it is the mirror. Most of the mirrorless bodies still have a mechanical focal plain shutter for still exposures, as they work better. So they have to close the shutter, flush the charge from the sensor then expose. The same happens for stills on a DSLR when using LV.

Alan

Right, my bad. My hands are way too shaky for LV, so I never use it anyway (which is another part of SL1 over M for me).


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/127590681@N03/ (external link)
I love a like, but feedback (including CC) is even better!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
burb1972
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
126 posts
Joined Aug 2013
     
Feb 09, 2015 08:10 |  #12

Thanks for all the great and informative replies.


mike parker
gear list 5dc, tamron 19-35, tamron 28-75, 50mm 1.8 mark 1, 28-70 3.5 canon(x2), 100 f/2 canon, 70-300 usm is, helios 44-2, vpk lens put into a m42 cap attached to a bellows, 430 ex

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
burb1972
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
126 posts
Joined Aug 2013
Post edited over 4 years ago by burb1972.
     
Feb 09, 2015 08:17 |  #13

http://en.m.wikipedia.​org/wiki/Flange_focal_​distance (external link)
difference between the eos M mount and the EF mount is one inch.


mike parker
gear list 5dc, tamron 19-35, tamron 28-75, 50mm 1.8 mark 1, 28-70 3.5 canon(x2), 100 f/2 canon, 70-300 usm is, helios 44-2, vpk lens put into a m42 cap attached to a bellows, 430 ex

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mclaren777
Goldmember
Avatar
1,482 posts
Likes: 85
Joined May 2012
Location: Olympia, WA
     
Feb 09, 2015 09:16 |  #14

It bums me out that Canon will probably never make something like the Sony RX1.

I just want Canon to make a small, full-frame camera with the 6D's sensor.


A simple comparison of sensor technology: Nikon vs. Canon (external link)
A technical comparison of sensor technology: Exposure Latitude (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
msowsun
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,243 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 270
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
     
Feb 09, 2015 10:09 |  #15

mclaren777 wrote in post #17423433 (external link)
It bums me out that Canon will probably never make something like the Sony RX1.

I just want Canon to make a small, full-frame camera with the 6D's sensor.

The Sony RX-1 is about $2,800 and is not without flaws. MaybeCanon could do a little better if they ever try to make something similar.

Cons

Autofocus speed not fast enough for moving subjects
Autofocus struggles in low light
Significant vignetting (as with similar lenses), corrections 'baked into' Raw files
Multiple button presses required to move AF point
No built-in viewfinder (and accessory options rather expensive)
No focus guides for video shooters
Disappointing video quality even when in focus
Focus peaking in un-magnified live view would have been a major benefit
Rear shoulder dial makes it less engaging to shoot in shutter-priority mode
Can't shoot X.Fine JPEG and Raw
No option to re-process Raw in camera
Lack of included charger makes it harder to keep a spare battery charged
The standard Sony Alpha function screen seems simplistic and inappropriate for this camera
Laggy to engage magnified image review
Awkward separation of movie and stills in playback


Mike Sowsun / S110 / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 18-135mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,179 views & 2 likes for this thread
eosm, why not an ef mount instead
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Jpremon
711 guests, 323 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.