skip to Main Content

[Rumor] Canon Mirrorless System Camera Rumor – Quick Update

Canon mirrorless camera concept by D. Riesenberg

While the hints for a Canon announcement on July 23, regarding the awaited mirrorless system camera, are getting stronger by the day, there are also more and more related rumor-bits surfacing here and there. Some of the rumors I got, coming from a source I trust, are saying that Canon’s upcoming mirrorless system camera

  • has a new type of mount and that Canon will provide an adapter for EF lenses (that was already considered to be most probable, nothing really new here)
  • features an APS-C sized sensor and not the sensor of the PowerShot G1 X (most of us thought it would have this sensor) – This is a new rumoured spec of Canon’s mirrorless camera, and – I guess – a very welcome one (if true)

Any news, thoughts, speculations…?

  • 111

    why could they not simply use the EF-S mount if it´s aps-c?

    i guess the size would be to big then?

    • Because the camera will be “Thinner” so the Lens Registration will be shorter. The Mirror Box is gone, so there is no need to keep that space it occupied.

      • matgay

        sony nex9 will kill eat this camera for breakfast!

  • Sean

    Glad to hear the APS-C sensor is back in the rumor mills. Shallower DOF and low light performance are two key image quality characteristics potential consumers will want to see. I don’t think FPS will be as important considering the limiting factor the AF will likely impose.

    • Napilopez

      AF will almost assuredly not be a limiting factor. The T4i has a hybrid PDAF/CDAF sensor. I full expect this new camera to follow suit.

      Shallower DoF is surely an advantage(though the less than one stop isn’t that important, imo), but low-light performance might not necessarily follow. Depends on sensor tech more than anything. Look at the OM-D. It matches or comes very very close to virtually every APS-C sensor except for that of the X-Pro 1 regarding detail retention at high iso.

  • Bob B.

    If the camera has an APS-c size sensor…the lenses will still have to be rather large…even if the lens mount changes.
    I am shooting FF and MFT (complete kits for both, fisheye to 350mm). This is not compelling enough to me to have a second smaller kit. (I am not dumping my FF system).
    To me this is a great choice when I am walking out the door to shoot. The two systems are very complementary to one another .
    …I am probably not the intended audience for the new Canon system,though.

    • I tend to agree to what Bob said. Unless canon has something up their sleeves, i can’t see the lenses being much smaller than the offerings by Sony (NEX) or Fuji (X-Pro), or even entry level APS-C DSLRs. With the new counterattack by FF cameras (and rumored cheaper FF offerings coming soon) and lack of high quality APS-C only lenses by the big guys (I’m talking to you, Canon and Nikon), the best possible combination seems to be M43 and FF. You want a small, portable, lightweight system with a great selection of primes? M43. You want the flexibility and sheer “horse power” of a full fledged professional system? FF.

      I’m still interested in seeing what Canon brings to the table. I like the no-nonsense approach by Canon, their cameras generally “just work”, no weird problems (hear fuji?), the menus are intuitive (hear Panasonic?), and the balance between features, price and iq is very good.

      • Nico Foto

        I agree that the best possible combination would be full-frame and a 4/3 format. APS-C was a viable alternative in the “early” days of digital; it may may not survive the onslaught of cheap full-frame systems that are coming down the pipes.

        But Canon has a tremendous installed base of EF lenses——and APS-C would make better use of them.

        Canon would hit a home run if the adapter provided phase-detection autofocus!

        • WT21

          I agree with Atlasman. FOR ME — I would much prefer my EPM1 for travel and a more compact FF (ala rumored Nikon D600) than an APS-C travel cam. Overall, and regardless of the format, Canon is late to the party. But their lens selection will be a huge strength for them, regardless of the sensor size. Having used Canon DSLRs for the last 3-4 years, I know their consumer level lenses well, and some of the L lenses. I am just as happy on my m43, and have no interest in their mirrorless, but I know I’ll still look :)

        • Bob B.

          Everyone is different. I just don”t see having an APS-C camera. The cameras are nearly the size of FF with a limited selection of dedicated lenses. The vast majority of Canon lenses are designed for FF cameras. So to buy in…(a good APS-C camera like a 7D .is no small investment). My money is better spent buying into FF. So many choices…and I have been shooting for 40 FF is soooooo familiar to me..
          The other cool thing about having FF and MFT is that the MFT lenses are exactly “half” equivalent…which keeps it simple, fluid and an easy flow in my brain. It’s pretty cool.
          And MFT just keeps getting better and better almost daily.
          Photography is pretty exciting these days!!!

          • Josh

            I get what you guys are saying, but its soo expensive for hobbyists to buy into two systems. I have a 550D and a couple of nice lenses and now my wife wants another body to carry around in her handbag. But she wants it to be small – like the V1. If the new Canon mirrorless was APS-C, could mount EF-S lenses with autofocus, but also had its own smaller lenses – i’d be the first to buy one.

      • Diane B

        Maybe you really mean Olympus’s menus. Panny’s are pretty straightforward.

  • How big the lens depends on the sensor size and distance between the lens and the sensor. When you remove the mirror, the lens can get close to the sensor so it can be designed to be smaller. The reason why EF-S lenses cannot be used on full frame cameras is because they are made closer to the sensor to take advantage of the small sensor size. X100 is an APS-C camera. It has a built in lens so it can be made as close as possible to the sensor, so it has a very compact size.

    • Steve

      You cannot reduce the distance between the sensor and lens (register distance) from what is required with APS-C DLSRs without impacting corner sharpness. Sony tried that with the 16mm and ended up with a poor quality lens.

      The x100 is different in that with a fixed lens you can design the micro lenses on the sensor to match the specific lens to help overcome the shorter register distance. You cannot do this with an Interchangeable system that needs to support lenses at various lengths and apertures.

      • Josh

        Excuse my ignorance, but how do leica make their lenses so small with a full frame sensor (m9).

        • “Excuse my ignorance, but how do leica make their lenses so small with a full frame sensor (m9).” /Josh

          No autofocus.

          • Jack

            Leica M lenses have no zoom, no AF motor nor IS. Prime, manual focused, non-IS lenses tend to be much smaller.

            Just look at the Leica 14-150mm for the original four thirds. They are bigger than many four third lenses. Also the 25mm f1.4 for m43 is no smaller than other m43 lenses.

        • … and, because it doesn’t have to accommodate a SLR mirror-box, M mount has a small register distance – only 27.8 mm compared with 44mm for Canon EF. That’s nearly 2cm you’re saving on the amount the lens extends from the film plane. With no mirror, the rear of the lens can also get a lot closer to the film plane inside the body.

          It has its downsides – this means light strikes the edges of a full frame digital sensor at quite an oblique angle. While that’s not much of a problem for film, it tends to make the corners vignette on digital since sensors like light coming in perpendicular to their surface. Leica had to jump through some hoops to get round that.

    • rrr_hhh

      I think this is wrong : APSC lenses aren’t closer to the sensor in Canon DSLRs : they just lack the full frame coverage, but if their register was shorter, you won’t be able to mount the FF lenses on APSC bodies without using an adapter.


    • WT21

      Good point, and could well be the case. Though if it’s small, and the weight is from build quality (not just being too large), it’ll likely be overlooked.

    • Bob B.

      ArtiCHOKE….um the GX1 weighs 9.59 oz. It’s light as hell? (and well built). Get ur facts straight.
      The OM-D is the tanker…especially with the top half of the battery grip (which is a must).
      I own both cameras and they are both so well built I don’t mind….but the GX 1 is the featherweight!!!

      • Bob B.

        ARti….Maybe U meant the G1X?

    • rrr_hhh

      I think so too : small and light has never been a Canon preoccupation. I think that with these models they rather want to go after the Sony SLT series, than after the Nex. It may not be such a bad choice.

    • Sig

      I don’t think the weight will matter that much .. Weight does matter of course, but when companies are innovating, a little extra weight aren’t their first concern.

  • ras

    my expectations for the first products:

    rebel-esque controls and build.
    collapsible zoom lenses, standard and long.
    wide-angle pancake.
    high mag. video zoom.
    no built-in evf, but accessory evf offered.
    phase-detect on sensor (hopefully).

    in other words, a nikon j1 with an aps-c sensor.

    still wondering what they’ll do differently, or if those comments were only in regards to the g1x.

  • Nick

    I think it is a pretty safe bet that an S100/S95 replacement will be announced in the very near future with the G1X sensor. With that in mind, APS-C makes sense for the mirrorless system. Especially since the bottom of the DSLR range will likely be supplanted by the mirrorless system in the next couple years. Putting the G1X sensor in a mirrorless body doesn’t offer enough differentiation in the product range.

  • 111

    in 2014 canon will have:

    point and shoots with the G1X sensor.
    entry level mirrorless cameras that can use EF and lesnes for the new mount.
    one or two aps-c DSLR cameras for wildlife/sport.
    a full range of FF cameras for consumer to professionell.

    • Richard

      What is interesting about this is that Canon have the ability to challenge the high ISO performance of all the MFT sensors with their well established APS-C sensor technology and can use the current generation of ASIC processors to achieve class (mirrorless) leading performance with what are pretty much parts bin pieces and, presumably, at competitive prices. If the body is roughly the size of the Fuji X Pro 1 or the Leica M8 it will not be the “almost pocketable” option that the Nikon 1 series is, but should provide a more compact than APS-C DSLR package. I suspect that there are a lot of people who would find such a package attractive. I use MFT and DX systems (and some 35mm). If the “native” lenses for the body can be kept down in size and weight this should be an attractive package. Even though this represents a first effort at a mirrorless digital camera for Canon, I do not thing they will make the same errors as the Fuji X Pro 1.

      It will be interesting to see whether Nikon will make a similar move.

  • Felipe Henao

    I just wish a good codec and please please NOT MOIRE, Like all Canon cameras except MARK III

  • Ronit

    I just want to see what canon comes up with, either it will lack many things or just have enough to make it sell like wild fire when it hits the market. I have a DSLR and how I wished I had another camera to go along with shooting. I don’t like to change lenses. I am dying to mount my canon 0.95 lens on a digital body capable of infinity focus. Yes I know there are mirrorless cameras there but I am looking at a Full frame and a vintage look design. There are other things I would like the mirrorless to have but these ones mentioned are at the top of my list. I am sure Canon would have something good up their sleeves. Right now Sony is at the top with their line of NEXs. I believe Sony will be a very big competitor with canon in years to come if canon is able to produce a good mirrorless. Just can’t wait.

  • Eddie Argos

    If the canon has:

    1. aps-c
    2. phase detect af
    3. fast prime lenses

    I will strongly consider returning my xpro1.

    I have resisted buying dslrs. I have used plenty. I think the canon rebel sized slr with the kit lens is a great package – but it is the largest camera i would consider actually carrying around for my needs.

    So in the mirrorless world i make the following observations:

    -modern aps-c does much better on iso mark than modern m43.

    -I don’t see much size benefit for m43 between sony nex7 and oly omd. Better implementation in some areas on the oly but certainly not a size advantage. Some m43 are of course nice and small but not as small as it seems like it could/would be.

    -If size is king like sony rx100 or canon g1x fixed lenses may be a better way to go. Funny how the Nikon 1 is starting to get taken more seriously though. It’s pretty great that so called “1”” sensors are now the smallest in any enthusiast P&S.

    -Not enough fast primes for micro43

    -i have a fuji x pro 1. I love everything about it (and will love it more as their lens roadmap has all the right pieces) with the exception that in a fantasy world i would like phase detect af. And would certainly prefer it were backed by a more stable player like canon.

Back To Top