Would you buy a Canon mirrorless slr if it didn't use EF lenses?

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by mark_stephan|2, Mar 25, 2018.

  1. Read a post on the Canon Rumors website and it mentioned something about Canon Pro's are currently testing a new mirrorless camera. If it's true would you buy it if the mount wasn't the EF mount we currently use? I can't imagine Canon changing the lens mount because of the millions of Canon and 3rd party lenses currently available for the EF mount.
  2. For me the answer is no. I have too much invested and I am happy with my current DSLRs, a 5DS R and 5D IV. I am happy that I came back from a mirrorless APS-C system. Now, if a 5DS R II were to be announced...
  3. "If it's true would you buy it if the mount wasn't the EF mount we currently use?"

    It would have to be a game changer for me to do that.

    "I can't imagine Canon changing the lens mount because of the millions of Canon and 3rd party lenses currently available for the EF mount."

    Canon will change a mount in a heart beat if it is to their benefit.....don't ever think otherwise. They burned me when they abandoned their FD lenses, but I bit the bullet and stayed with them anyways. Companies only care about their bottom line........Sony is actually the worst of the bunch as far as dropping many of their product lines. Technology marches on and we have to deal with what's available to us, so I change when I'm forced to or when something is that much better than what I have.
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2018
  4. OK, a new mirrorless camera with a flange focal distance of 44mm would be unprecedented, and essentially be as thick as a current Canon FF camera. You could still not mount FD or Leica M lenses on it like you can with the Sony E system (with its 18mm flange focal distance). It also appears that with an adapter, EF lenses work quite well with the latest Canon M cameras (with duel pixel AF). I would hope that Canon does not create a 3rd lens mount and is able to run its FF mirrorless with the current M mount, and all us EOS folks can happily use our EF lenses with an adapter.

    That being said, I have no idea what Canon is going to do and a native EF mount mirrorless is certainly possible (and would be the ugliest duckling in the mirrorless world).
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2018
  5. If I have to start reinvesting in lenses, essentially starting over from scratch, that opens up a wide door.
  6. There is are arguments for both keeping the current lens and making a new lens mount.
    Because both Canon and Nikon have done so in the past, so they may do it again in the future.
    The Nikon guys would have the same concern as you Canon guys.

    EF mount
    • Pro
      • You can use all your current EF lenses.
      • This is not so cut and dry. The Nikon F mount has been the same mount since the 1950s. But the lens coupling (aperture, metering, autofocus, manual focus, etc) has changed many times. So while the mount itself may not change, the coupling mechanism could.
    • Con
      • Would saddle the mirror-less camera with the thickness of the dslr. So you loose possible gain in a thinner camera.
    New mount
    • Pro
      • They get to start from scratch and design a mount specifically for the mirror-less and what they might want to do later.
      • Any issues with the EF mount can be addressed with a new mount.
      • With a new mount, they don't have to worry about a lens that sticks into the body, which would damage the mirror, cuz there is no mirror to worry about.
      • By making a clean cut, they don't have to worry about maintaining compatibility with the older lenses. Canon's switch to the EF mount was a clean cut switch, vs. Nikon's gradual changes to the F mount. With the Nikon F mount, you need a compatibility chart to determine if your old lens will work on a new camera or a new lens will work on your old camera.
    • Con
      • As mentioned, this would force all the current users to buy new lenses, which might be a Canon plan to make money on a system change.
      • The entire current lens lineup would not likely be available on introduction, so you may have to wait for the lens you want, to be made in the new mount.
    • An adapter might/could be made, to make EF lenses work on the new mount...maybe.
    A 3rd option is where Canon could make the initial models with an EF mount. Then switch mounts later, once they get enough people hooked on their mirror-less cameras.

    Finally, no one knows what the product marketing guys have on their long term road map.
  7. I think Sigma released mirrorlesses with their old SLR mount? Anyhow: I honestly don't care if folks glue a tube on their good old lenses or rivet another on their new camera. The fact that a Sony with *insert focal length* is as long as a Canon with similar lens is discussed to death.Looking at users who own multiple lenses per body I'd think body bulk is the better deal when bulk reduction is the goal?
    @Ken Katz Is there any serious hope that especially Canon will suddenly out of the blue offer a camera that integrates all their entirely abandoned legacy mounts? (FD, LTM was there another SLR mount?) I'd think the adaptomaniacs own Sonys by now, with AF even for the RF glass and with stacked adapters for FD too. Does the current EOS M system lend itself to adapting like Sony and Fuji seem to do? To my understanding it integrates EF glass via a Canon adapter but doesn't really support manual mounts? - Selling points seem the dual pixel AF, color rendering and known brand name.

    I honestly don't know what I'd buy and when I'll be able to afford it. For the latter reason I also don't own enough EF lenses to shed tears after that mount. With an external monitor attached the 5D IV might become "mirrorless enough" for my needs, especially if Magic Lantern ever manage to cater it.
    I can see myself downsizing from FF, for load reduction's sake or mixing systems. It should take low light and AF performance at a bearable price to catch me as a customer. Right now questions like "Am I saving up for the 85/1.4 IS or would I be happier with Sony eye AF?" and "Should I go for a Pentax on the wide end?" are admittedly running through my head, while I am awaiting news about Fuji or Olympus finally offering sports AF.
  8. They had better make an EF mount adaptor, because without one the Sony A7 III and A7RIII with Metabones adaptor becomes a sensible option for anyone who has a sizable investment in expensive EF mount lenses just from a business decission stand point.

    Is it so far out of Canon's wheel house to just give us a 5D mirrorless body option. Tiny skinny camera body can be an entirely different camera option. Personally with my hands I prefer the current 5D MK IV Body size, I even have a grip. If I want a camera I could but in my shirt pocket I can use my android phone.

    Canon should also really concentrate on what ever new model being more competitive with price and image quality and options to what is on the market if it does not want to lose more market share to churn. I have seen so many Canon guys sell their Canon gear and move to other brands. There are things Canon could easily do to improve IQ and reduce costs, like remove the AA filter from the camera, go with an electronic shutter.
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2018
  9. I have looked at the current crop of Canon EF-M mirrorless and although I think they work fine, I don't like them much. Too small to me. I like to get a good grip. Olympus and Sony are much nicer to hold and to use in my opinion. When Canon produce a full frame mirrorless, I feel certain that Canon will either use the EF mount as is (my preference), or will provide a seamless EF adapter. If they don't pick either of these options then I think it would be a big mistake. Canon could then produce special EF-M FF lenses going forward, if they insist on making a thinner mirrorless body. They may well do this. I'd prefer to keep the same flange distance myself, but I can see that is a dilemma for Canon. I think a slightly smaller body along the lines of the EF-S cameras or 6D would be just fine and we know that mirrorless bodies are tending to get bigger because this is actually what many want (see the larger Fuji XH1 and Sony A7III with the deeper grip), so it would not be much of big deal to keep the EF mount as is. If they change then the adapter has to be really good, and provide seamless, native-like AF performance with EF lenses.
    Jochen likes this.
  10. Sigma and Metabones will, undoubtedly, produce T-adapters from EF-to-X, UNLESS, Canon makes its own. Why wouldn't Canon make it's own? It makes no sense not to.

    My EF lenses work fine on my Sony FE bodies, using the Metabones EF-to-E T-adapter MkV.

    [​IMG]Red-tail Portrait by David Stephens, on Flickr

    All that said, a pro should welcome smaller, lighter lenses with better IQ, as is possible with mirrorless lens-to-sensor shortened distance. Much as I love my EF lenses, all have been replaced by Sony FE lenses, except my EF 500/f4. I suspect that'll be gone as soon as Sony releases its FE 400/f2.8 GM OSS.
  11. I use the EOS M and M10 regularly for specific jobs. They are nice cameras but with some limitations, one is the small size. I never went from a 10D to a 20D because the latter felt too small. Bought a 5D instead.

    FF EOS: Body size needs to be regular size, like the old day film bodies (A-series, EOS 30) with a vertical/battery grip available. Perhaps a new mount with a dedicated adapter for EF lenses would be great. Use of all EF lenses and Canon can introduce new ones with/for shorter flange in the next years. If they do this and the price is right I'm in.

    Regarding price: no jokes like the 80D/M5 comparison: leave the mirrorbox out and sell at a higher price.
  12. Let Canon surprise us as they did with the 300D. A decent spec'd body, somewhat like the 6DII, a new FF-M mount. With converter for EF lenses in the box for $1200. Lots of people will buy it.
    Forgot to mention: with optional battery grip.
    Landrum Kelly and Jochen like this.

Share This Page