[thibs]

If you asked any of the main camera companies whether they were considering a new mount, chances are they would all say "yes". All companies have to watch the market very carefully, do their R&D and feasibility studies and think through the kind of company they'd like to be in a few years' time. But actually putting such an idea into production is a very different thing since a poor decision over something so fundamental could easily destroy the whole enterprise.

I see it as a Canon manager speculating on the shape of the post-Rebel era. It could mean something or nothing. It's perfectly plausible that Canon's FF lines could stay exactly where they are but that any system based on a smaller sensor would change substantially, for example. Such a smaller system could be 1", M43, APS-C or something else. I suppose this is all another aspect of the famous "squeeze" on the traditional market for APS-C cameras. Now that the upper jaws in the form of more affordable FF have been largely dealt with, attention is turning to the lower set of teeth. The various technical challenges there - fast on-sensor AF, quality EVFs and the like - are beginning to be dealt with. Likely the idea is not to be caught between the jaws when the beast becomes hungry

Yep.
And it could also, btw, be a simple but FUD strategy. Always very effective.

[Mistral75]

For those of you who haven't read the document referred to by Photo Rumors, it's an interview of Mr Makoto Sakaeta Masaya, managing director of Canon Image Communication Business Division, with Digital Camera Watch http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/20140918_667456.html

He says Canon are exploring the possibility of a new mount (distinct from EF, EF-S and EF-M) for a 'new generation' camera system with R&D efforts focussing on a new communication interface between the camera body and lens, new optic design and new sensor design, the goal being to downsize the camera system whilst maintaining an image quality comparable to that of the EF system.

He adds that a high image quality will be very difficult to obtain with a smaller sensor since there is a limit on the number of photons that can be captured per unit area.

The optimal sensor size shall take into account the need to downsize the system whilst maintaining a quality comparable to that of EOS 6D and 5D Mark III with EF lenses today. Improvements in the photoelectric conversion efficiency (sensor, optical design, image processing) could lead to smaller sensors in the future. Determine the optimal solution for sensor size will be a major R&D theme for Canon.

He therefore points at the possibility for Canon to use smaller sensors (smaller than APS-C, the interviewer even makes an explicit reference to µ4/3) and never makes any allusion to a new 24x36 mount, either mirrorless or mirrored.

If you read some French, here is a more detailed translation / transcription I wrote yesterday on Chassimages (I am too lazy to translate it into English after having bothered to translate the original Japanese text into French).

L'interviewé, Makoto Sakaeta Masaya, directeur général de la division "Image Communication" de Canon, parle d'une nouvelle monture (autre que EF, EF-S et EF-M) pour des boîtiers les plus compacts possibles.

Voici une transcription en français, tantôt fidèle, tantôt résumée de ses dires à ce propos.

"Une partie de la R&D est consacrée à un système avec une nouvelle monture qui est différent du système à monture EF. (...) Nous étudions quelle pourrait être la plate-forme de nouvelle génération, en termes d'interface de communication entre le boîtier et l'objectif, de conception optique et de conception des capteurs. La raison d'une telle R&D est que la diminution de taille est un des besoins pour les APN. Le système EF, tout particulièrement les objectifs en monture EF, s'attache à fournir la meilleure qualité d'image de tous les temps mais le fait est qu'il y a des appels pour une diminution de taille indépendamment de cette direction [choisie pour le système EF]"

Il parle ensuite du système EF-M / EOS-M dont, tout en maintenant une qualité d'image équivalente à celle du système EF, il leur appartient de "maximiser la portabilité". Le système EOS-M vient de et va bénéficier de la sortie de nouveaux objectifs et, très bientôt, d'un nouveau boîtier, l'accent continuant d'être mis sur l'amélioration de la "portabilité".

(携帯性 signifie portabilité, sachant que sa version raccourcie 携帯 signifie portable au sens de téléphone mobile, donc on a une notion d'objet connecté ici)

Il distingue les efforts de compacité faits à la fois pour les systèmes EF et EF-M d'un côté, les recherches [à plus long terme] sur le "système photo du futur" (aussi entre guillemets dans le texte original : “これからのシステムカメラ”) de l'autre.

L'interviewer lui demande si la solution ne serait pas dans l'utilisation d'une nouvelle monture et d'un capteur plus petit. La réponse de Makoto Sakaeta Masaya est la suivante :

"Une haute qualité [d'image] sera très difficile [à obtenir] avec un [capteur de] petit format car vous êtes limité par la quantité de photons qui peuvent être captés par unité de surface. Dans le futur, en tenant compte de l'amélioration de l'efficacité de la conversion photoélectrique (capteur, conception optique, traitement de l'image), la taille du capteur fera que le système est optimal ou pas. Trouver la solution optimale sera un thème majeur."

L'interviewer lui demande enfin si l'amélioration de la qualité d'image des petits capteurs obtenue grâce à l'amélioration de l'efficacité de la conversion photoélectrique ne pourrait pas faire par exemple du µ4/3 la solution optimale ou bien si ce dernier ne permet pas d'atteindre la "bonne taille" pour un APN à objectifs interchangeables.

La réponse de Makoto Sakaeta Masaya est que Canon pourrait adopter le µ4/3 s'il s'avérait constituer la solution optimale et un bon système pour maximiser la valeur apportée au client mais qu'aujourd'hui l'optimum qualitatif est plutôt du côté des EOS 6D et 5D Mark III et des objectifs EF, même s'il leur faut être capables de diminuer la taille du système dans le futur. La question est de savoir quelle taille [de capteur] permettra de maintenir cette qualité d'image et jusqu'à quel point ils pourront réduire la taille du système. Aujourd'hui, ils n'ont pas pris la décision de lancer un nouveau système bâti autour d'une nouvelle monture et ils continuent d'explorer [les différentes possibilités].

[MarkJerling]

I for one welcome the idea of a mirrorless FF camera that is not K-mount. For one of the
advantages of a mirrorless camera is its relatively small size. Pentax is working very hard
to make small DSLRs. And indeed K-7/K-5/K-3 basically have the smallest form factor
among their peers. But I think size-wise they have probably hit the roof, because of the
mirror box. So to further reduce the camera size, giving up the mirror is a natural approach.

Yes, some advantages, but also the disadvantage of the loss of an optical viewfinder. While giving up the mirror might give a size advantage, there's no good reason to move away from a well liked, practical and proven mount.

What does this rumor has to do with Ricoh/Pentax? As we all know, Ricoh/Pentax always
says that they are studying the market closely, and there is no release schedule for their
35mm full frame yet. Technically speaking, it should not be too difficult for Ricoh/Pentax
to make a FF DSLR. So what is their concern, and what are they studying anyway?

What they have said is that they have a department working on a FF product. What they have not confirmed is when they intend to bring that FF product to market. I would imagine that they'll be carefully studying the FF market to ensure that place their product at a position where it would stand a good chance of getting a decent FF market share. But, that's just my guess, of course.

If the two new telephoto zoom lenses are really for FF, then it seems that
Ricoh/Pentax is planning a professional or semi-professional FF DSLR body, as putting these
giant lenses on a mirrorless camera just does not make too much sense

The two lenses are K-mount, that much is clear. Lastly, let's not forget that the K-mount was designed for FF. it has the versatility for crop sensor use, but it's a very good size for FF.

[Rondec]

The only real benefit of a new mount, as far as I can tell, is the ability to mount more lenses via adapters. I just wonder, though, how big a draw this would be for folks to Pentax, considering that Sony and four thirds have been doing this forever (Sony, now with full frame e mount). Maybe there is a little smaller size, but I don't know that that is a particular reason to go with it, considering that lenses stay the same size for a given sensor.

[rawr]

Pentax already has four active mounts (K, Q, 645, 6x7). Do we really need another?

And the 'Sony mirrorless mount' (E-mount) is not new or full-frame specific. E-mount spent many years as APS-C only, before Sony decided to introduce the A7 series and make some full-frame lenses for E-mount, and then call them FE lenses. But Sony still maintains E-mount as both APS-C and FF.

[Zygonyx]

Who knows, maybe Canon is working on a new mirrorless medium format mount ?

[zmohie]

pentax allready has the smart concept on mirror less ..it is the k01. if they make some effort on this concept then we could expect k02 with out adding more mounts. some see k01 is big so what about samsung nx1.

[Pål Jensen]

Who knows, maybe Canon is working on a new mirrorless medium format mount ?

To make image quality comparable to entry level FF bodies? Hardly.
It seems clear to me that this isn't about FF at all, but smaller sensored cameras that can achieve (todays) FF quality in a smaller overall package.

[Adam]

Please continue discussion in this thread, posted earlier:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/76-non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/273...nt-system.html

[johnmflores]

Canon's gonna make a Q clone!

Send in the Qlones!

[Mistral75]

Canon says they could launch a "new mount" system. | Mirrorless Rumors

---------- Post added 09-20-2014 at 07:13 AM ----------

If Canon ever produce mirrorless FF camera, it could the same situation like with Canon 300D - the fist mass production DSLR with price lower 1000USD.
Canon could produce hi-end and cheaper and simplier version of such camera and FF could be real with price lower than 1500USD.
Such camera will compete with Sony Alfa and could be more successful. And it could change the market radically.

It's just a guess, of course.

I am reposting here a message from another thread on the same topic.

For those of you who haven't read the document referred to by Mirrorless Rumors and Photo Rumors too, it's an interview of Mr Makoto Sakaeta Masaya, managing director of Canon Image Communication Business Division, with Digital Camera Watch http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/20140918_667456.html

He says Canon are exploring the possibility of a new mount (distinct from EF, EF-S and EF-M) for a 'new generation' camera system with R&D efforts focussing on a new communication interface between the camera body and lens, new optic design and new sensor design, the goal being to downsize the camera system whilst maintaining an image quality comparable to that of the EF system.

He adds that a high image quality will be very difficult to obtain with a smaller sensor since there is a limit on the number of photons that can be captured per unit area.

The optimal sensor size shall take into account the need to downsize the system whilst maintaining a quality comparable to that of EOS 6D and 5D Mark III with EF lenses today. Improvements in the photoelectric conversion efficiency (sensor, optical design, image processing) could lead to smaller sensors in the future. Determine the optimal solution for sensor size will be a major R&D theme for Canon.

He therefore points at the possibility for Canon to use smaller sensors (smaller than APS-C, the interviewer even makes an explicit reference to µ4/3) and never makes any allusion to a new 24x36 mount, either mirrorless or mirrored.

If you read some French, here is a more detailed translation / transcription I wrote yesterday on Chassimages (I am too lazy to translate it into English after having bothered to translate the original Japanese text into French).

L'interviewé, Makoto Sakaeta Masaya, directeur général de la division "Image Communication" de Canon, parle d'une nouvelle monture (autre que EF, EF-S et EF-M) pour des boîtiers les plus compacts possibles.

Voici une transcription en français, tantôt fidèle, tantôt résumée de ses dires à ce propos.

"Une partie de la R&D est consacrée à un système avec une nouvelle monture qui est différent du système à monture EF. (...) Nous étudions quelle pourrait être la plate-forme de nouvelle génération, en termes d'interface de communication entre le boîtier et l'objectif, de conception optique et de conception des capteurs. La raison d'une telle R&D est que la diminution de taille est un des besoins pour les APN. Le système EF, tout particulièrement les objectifs en monture EF, s'attache à fournir la meilleure qualité d'image de tous les temps mais le fait est qu'il y a des appels pour une diminution de taille indépendamment de cette direction [choisie pour le système EF]"

Il parle ensuite du système EF-M / EOS-M dont, tout en maintenant une qualité d'image équivalente à celle du système EF, il leur appartient de "maximiser la portabilité". Le système EOS-M vient de et va bénéficier de la sortie de nouveaux objectifs et, très bientôt, d'un nouveau boîtier, l'accent continuant d'être mis sur l'amélioration de la "portabilité".

(携帯性 signifie portabilité, sachant que sa version raccourcie 携帯 signifie portable au sens de téléphone mobile, donc on a une notion d'objet connecté ici)

Il distingue les efforts de compacité faits à la fois pour les systèmes EF et EF-M d'un côté, les recherches [à plus long terme] sur le "système photo du futur" (aussi entre guillemets dans le texte original : “これからのシステムカメラ”) de l'autre.

L'interviewer lui demande si la solution ne serait pas dans l'utilisation d'une nouvelle monture et d'un capteur plus petit. La réponse de Makoto Sakaeta Masaya est la suivante :

"Une haute qualité [d'image] sera très difficile [à obtenir] avec un [capteur de] petit format car vous êtes limité par la quantité de photons qui peuvent être captés par unité de surface. Dans le futur, en tenant compte de l'amélioration de l'efficacité de la conversion photoélectrique (capteur, conception optique, traitement de l'image), la taille du capteur fera que le système est optimal ou pas. Trouver la solution optimale sera un thème majeur."

L'interviewer lui demande enfin si l'amélioration de la qualité d'image des petits capteurs obtenue grâce à l'amélioration de l'efficacité de la conversion photoélectrique ne pourrait pas faire par exemple du µ4/3 la solution optimale ou bien si ce dernier ne permet pas d'atteindre la "bonne taille" pour un APN à objectifs interchangeables.

La réponse de Makoto Sakaeta Masaya est que Canon pourrait adopter le µ4/3 s'il s'avérait constituer la solution optimale et un bon système pour maximiser la valeur apportée au client mais qu'aujourd'hui l'optimum qualitatif est plutôt du côté des EOS 6D et 5D Mark III et des objectifs EF, même s'il leur faut être capables de diminuer la taille du système dans le futur. La question est de savoir quelle taille [de capteur] permettra de maintenir cette qualité d'image et jusqu'à quel point ils pourront réduire la taille du système. Aujourd'hui, ils n'ont pas pris la décision de lancer un nouveau système bâti autour d'une nouvelle monture et ils continuent d'explorer [les différentes possibilités].

[Aristophanes]

Almost all dedicated camera makers will be forced by the smartphone segment to compete in the 2 areas of qualitative difference:

1) optics
2) sensor size

The Q is doomed. The Ricoh GR and a GXR replacement is effectively what is needed. All one really needs for a competitive mirrorless system is a FL range from (135 eq.) of 20-135mm, and even then the portability factor makes lenses from the 24-85mm 95% of the market. Using an APS-C sensor you can do something like the old Contax system and have a 5-6 primes and 2 zooms and you're done. That creates the status of a second system to the DSLR (slightly faster AF, more processing power, grips, wider lens array, long tells, more rugged, OVF, etc.).

I think Canon is essentially saying the same. 1" sensor will be the smallest differentiator. (The Q is doomed). The thinking is clear and that AF and optics need to start with the sensor.

Personally I think the recent Pentax executive interviews done here was not very helpful or made the case for Ricoh being market savvy or forward thinking. They still do not "get" the built-in wi-fi requirement and will not until this season's December quarter sales tank where this will be a factor. Canon's thinking out loud appears to be more an attempt to tap into where the market needs to go in a smartphone world.

And so on...

[Blue]

Almost all dedicated camera makers will be forced by the smartphone segment to compete in the 2 areas of qualitative difference:

1) optics
2) sensor size

The Q is doomed. The Ricoh GR and a GXR replacement is effectively what is needed. All one really needs for a competitive mirrorless system is a FL range from (135 eq.) of 20-135mm, and even then the portability factor makes lenses from the 24-85mm 95% of the market. Using an APS-C sensor you can do something like the old Contax system and have a 5-6 primes and 2 zooms and you're done. That creates the status of a second system to the DSLR (slightly faster AF, more processing power, grips, wider lens array, long tells, more rugged, OVF, etc.).

I think Canon is essentially saying the same. 1" sensor will be the smallest differentiator. (The Q is doomed). The thinking is clear and that AF and optics need to start with the sensor.

Personally I think the recent Pentax executive interviews done here was not very helpful or made the case for Ricoh being market savvy or forward thinking. They still do not "get" the built-in wi-fi requirement and will not until this season's December quarter sales tank where this will be a factor. Canon's thinking out loud appears to be more an attempt to tap into where the market needs to go in a smartphone world.

And so on...

Someone needs to tell Ricoh the Q is doomed. The pretty much just said it is their "Pentax" mirrorless system in the PentaxForums youtube interview.

[thibs]

Almost all dedicated camera makers will be forced by the smartphone segment to compete in the 2 areas of qualitative difference:

1) optics
2) sensor size

The Q is doomed. The Ricoh GR and a GXR replacement is effectively what is needed. All one really needs for a competitive mirrorless system is a FL range from (135 eq.) of 20-135mm, and even then the portability factor makes lenses from the 24-85mm 95% of the market. Using an APS-C sensor you can do something like the old Contax system and have a 5-6 primes and 2 zooms and you're done. That creates the status of a second system to the DSLR (slightly faster AF, more processing power, grips, wider lens array, long tells, more rugged, OVF, etc.).

I think Canon is essentially saying the same. 1" sensor will be the smallest differentiator. (The Q is doomed). The thinking is clear and that AF and optics need to start with the sensor.

Personally I think the recent Pentax executive interviews done here was not very helpful or made the case for Ricoh being market savvy or forward thinking. They still do not "get" the built-in wi-fi requirement and will not until this season's December quarter sales tank where this will be a factor. Canon's thinking out loud appears to be more an attempt to tap into where the market needs to go in a smartphone world.

And so on...

On the contrary, Pentax is ahead.
And even if the Q in its current form had to fade, they have experience with smaller sensor (Yes, Nikon does as well) that *nobody* has at all (again, but Nikon).
If Pentax needs to go 1", they'll do it a lot more easily than some others. Because they have experience.

[Christine Tham]

People were laughing when Sony introduced the NEX system and E-mount.

I know ... I was one of those people laughing. Short registration distance and APS-C would mean small bodies huge lenses - "beer can on a pack of playing cards." And that's exactly what we saw in the first generation.

But somehow along the way, Sony managed to make the concept work and today we have viable full frame cameras and lenses. Who would have guessed?

I actually thought the Canon EOS-M idea was smart. I was so ready to buy the EOS-M when it was announced. But Canon has not executed well on the concept.

Even Leica introduced a new mount with the Leica T (which unfortunately seems too little too late).

Not sure what Canon should do - going small (1", u4/3) is not necessarily smart - Nikon hasn't had much success with the Nikon 1 despite it having some clever features like a really nice AF system.

Full frame (or larger) would be nice, but then Canon would have the same issues as Sony - small body, large lenses.

I've always though Pentax had an advantage because they make the smallest AF full frame lenses, pity about the registration distance. But then the small lenses tend to be screw drive AF, which would require a K-01 type body to operate them.

Not easy being a camera manufacturer these days.