- Messages
- 2,457
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
My vote goes to fitting EF/EF-S lenses on to the new full frame mount. They did it with the M series and i hope this is what they do now.
EF-S lenses don’t cover a ff sensor.My vote goes to fitting EF/EF-S lenses on to the new full frame mount. They did it with the M series and i hope this is what they do now.
EF-S lenses don’t cover a ff sensor.
They don’t let us fit them on a FF DSLR why change the rules for a mirrorless?
IMHO The Nikon kludge for this is stupid. The canon one makes sense, I’d bet serious money they’re not about to alter their stance.
Would follow the obvious feasibility
- EF lenses for everything.
- EFS for crop DSLR and mirrorless
- EFM for crop mirrorless
- EFR for ff and crop mirrorless
The other direction makes more sense.
Canon never implemented a crop mode, so don’t fit crop lenses on ff cameras.
OTOH an adaptor to fit R lenses onto M cameras is a continuation of the ef-m adaptor.
The M series can already use all EF pro quality lenses. I already use a Sigma Art 35 and a 135L on mine (though not that often)All speculation at the moment anyway, the reality will probably be a lot less interesting, LOL.
Not sure if it is the case with all EF-S lenses, but it seems most wider angles will cover a full frame sensor, the reason for Canon not allowing them to fit is that they foul the mirror on an EF camera if not modified. That wont be a problem on a mirrorless full frame though.
On the other hand though, if it is EF-R to EF-M it will open up the M series to a bunch of pro quality L lenses in one single move.
Either way it should be a winner for many of us.
There would have to be a crop mode for EF-S lenses to work decently. Just like Sony have, you can use Ef-S lenses on an A7III, in crop mode, and they seem to work ok.
Mike
Not Canon but how about this.....
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.co.uk/ulk/itm/253785637636
Yes I have seen those thanks, just a shame Canon don't make a proper grip with extra battery capacity. I may well get one (Amazon sell them as well) but will wait and see what is announced next week first just incase I have to sell the M5.
The only grip-type accessory that Canon sell for the M series is their range of half body jackets. Which started with the original M body..
Yes I bought a Chinese knockoff on Ebay for the M5 ... does make the grip slightly easier to hang on to but makes the camera look a bit strange IMO.
Are any of you contemplating upgrading to the FF ML from Canon? Or sicking with the APSC?
I’m pretty sure most of us have canon DSLRs too, which makes M users different to most other brands mirrorless users.
I think a switch up to ff will depend greatly on the camera, a mirrorless 6dII might have me reaching for the Visacard. But I’m in no hurry, the 7d, 6d, M5 combo is pretty good.
Are any of you contemplating upgrading to the FF ML from Canon? Or sicking with the APSC?
It will be on my radar for sure but..... it will have to be a meaningful and beneficial tool.
If Canon take a route map that leads into dead ends of crippled functionality or decide ghat they want a fast return on their investment, then who knows?
The simple fact is that the ‘Pro’ users will have their business hats on and that means the equation between investment balanced against cost/benefit and cost of ownership - (use of current peripherals).
The serious amateur and part time semi pro have similar needs but, again, price and cost of ownership are a basic.
For me, the M series weight balanced out the restrictions of my changed and changing health limitations. I can no longer cram a 400 backpack with a heavyweight D kit along with a tent etc and disappear for a couple of days. If the FF does not compromise my limitations ghen yes I will be looking at it.
Steve
Supposedly this is what it looks like. Not sure I believe those lenses are the real deal.
https://www.canonrumors.com/here-ar...-the-canon-eos-r-and-the-new-rf-mount-lenses/
I like the idea of the 28-105. I might go for that as a starter lens.
Hmmm ... I wish they'd all stop trying to look the same.
It’s the way the world works now.
There are so few good looking cameras that it really doesn’t matter that much.
Though I appreciate it’s a matter of personal taste, I don’t mind that the M5 is pig ugly compared to the Fuji it’s replaced, because it’s a better camera for me*
*i know I could get a better Fuji than the M5 but I like the fact I don’t have to spend a grand on a couple of decent lenses that I already own.
Funny how one can get burnt out with some makes,I used to love Fuji's,still love the look but I can't ever see me owning one again.It’s the way the world works now.
There are so few good looking cameras that it really doesn’t matter that much.
Though I appreciate it’s a matter of personal taste, I don’t mind that the M5 is pig ugly compared to the Fuji it’s replaced, because it’s a better camera for me*
*i know I could get a better Fuji than the M5 but I like the fact I don’t have to spend a grand on a couple of decent lenses that I already own.
the processing really suits the image, is that a pre-set or one off setting? would you mind sharing what pp you did pleaseOne from Yesterday with the M100 and 50mm 1.8 STM
Lizard Street Taxi (1 of 1) by Andrew Duxbury, on Flickr
It can't be the same as the current mounts. The EOS-M mount is only designed to cover the image circle of a crop-sensor, and the EF mount is designed to put the lens at the distance from the sensor required to clear the mirror box. If they used the same mount as either of those, there would be confusion over which lenses could be used. They *could* do what Sony does and use the EOS-M mount, and when a crop-sensor lens was mounted it would crop the image. But that's messy and confusing.I am bit shocked that the FF canon mirrorless wont be the same mount as this?
bizare considering the ef mount was made for crop and ff sensor and now we have two seperate mounts for there crop and ff mirrorless
the processing really suits the image, is that a pre-set or one off setting? would you mind sharing what pp you did please
It can't be the same as the current mounts. The EOS-M mount is only designed to cover the image circle of a crop-sensor, and the EF mount is designed to put the lens at the distance from the sensor required to clear the mirror box. If they used the same mount as either of those, there would be confusion over which lenses could be used. They *could* do what Sony does and use the EOS-M mount, and when a crop-sensor lens was mounted it would crop the image. But that's messy and confusing.
Are any of you contemplating upgrading to the FF ML from Canon? Or sicking with the APSC?
isn't there an apsc "e-mount" as well-I am sure I remember there being a range of e-mounts not for full frame useConfusing?
Sony has 2 mounts. A and E.
Canon now has 4. EF, efs, efm and eos R.
well it works a treat for that shotHi Nico,
I've made myself some presets in lightroom for different situations, Landscape, Street, Architecture, Tones etc . I tend to test and try various ones and then use the one that's best suited and slightly adjust that works the best, so i'm not sure what I have done on this one TBH!
isn't there an apsc "e-mount" as well-I am sure I remember there being a range of e-mounts not for full frame use
so some lenes fit e-mount but dont cover full frame image circle-the Sony E 10-18mm f4 OSS as on example?No there is just e mount
Yea. You got it. Simpleso some lenes fit e-mount but dont cover full frame image circle-the Sony E 10-18mm f4 OSS as on example?
so that's the same as canon efs mount really.Yea. You got it. Simple
Hence why didn't canon do the same thing with there mirrorless.so that's the same as canon efs mount really.