It depends on the lens design. For instance, here's a link to hacking and putting a 10-22 lens on to a 1D https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/609503 Apparently, it fills the frame at 12mm.
It works with an EF-S 17-85 as well. Just remove (now sawing required) the rubber coated flange in the mount, replace it with the flange of an EF 24-85 (optional) and there you go. You get some vignetting at 17mm, but it works quite well if you zoom in a tad.
The red dot is for EF alignment, the white square is the EFs alignment mark
so it definitely looks to be EF & EFs compatible.
The rear bayonet is for sure smaller than EF.
And for those worried about FF, there could be a modified version with a larger throat diameter released at a later date, that is if Canon even wants it to have a FF sensor, I'd be happy with APS-H if there was no FF.
For all we know, the lens adapter patent was filed in anticipation of a new video camera, maybe an updated XL-HD using an APS-C CMOS chip. That's where Sony and Panasonic can threaten Canon. As much as I'd love to see what they come up with, I don't think Canon's going to jump in the mirrorless wonder business anytime soon.
LightShow wrote:
Nikon RF looks like it will fit(re. 31mm)
The red dot is for EF alignment, the white square is the EFs alignment mark
so it definitely looks to be EF & EFs compatible.
The rear bayonet is for sure smaller than EF.
And for those worried about FF, there could be a modified version with a larger throat diameter released at a later date, that is if Canon even wants it to have a FF sensor, I'd be happy with APS-H if there was no FF.
The red dot is for lens alignment to bodies in general. Olympus OM, Minolta, Sony Alpha 4/3 and Micro 4/3 use a red dot or sphere for lens alignment. Thus, the lens alignment sphere/dot doesn't necessarily mean a specific lens mount is used.
JimBuchanan wrote:
I hope not, also, for that reason.
If the drawing is in fact an EF lens adapter for a shorter registration Canon body, and the 2 views are to scale with each other, I calculate a registration of 31mm for the new Canon camera.
So, if this drawing is any indication to an actual product, does that mean that we can rule out a FF?
dasrocket wrote:
The rear mount is smaller in diameter than the front mount; assuming the front is EF, the rear has to be a smaller format; which negates FF IMO.
Leica M mount is 44mm in diameter, Canon EF mount is 54mm. There are faster lenses on M than EF, both are full frame.
Yakim Peled wrote:
So, if this drawing is any indication to an actual product, does that mean that we can rule out a FF?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Once again, registration distance for Leica M is 27.8mm, so I don't think this rules anything out.
The difference is that the M mount was designed at a time when digital sensors and oblique light rays weren't as much of a concern. It took quite a while for Leica to develop a usable solution for a fullframe sensor in their relatively narrow mount, and I doubt they would have made it as small as it is, had they designed it today. Plus, Leica still has to use software coding as a fix, which is a bit dubious IMO.
Mounts designed with oblique light rays in mind, like 4/3, m4/3, Contax N, NEX, all have a much larger mount diameter to sensor diagonal ratio, and I'd bet that Canon stuffing a 35mm sensor into this alleged camera is about as likely as Sony stuffing a 35mm sensor in NEX, or m4/3 stuffing an aps-c sensor in their cameras. Unlikely.
We have to remember that "fullframe" for any system relates to a sensor size that matches the image circle that the system's lenses were designed for. Judging by the mount diameter size of this possible new Canon, I'm betting that its "fullframe" sensor equates to something smaller than a 35mm sensor.
How about Canon goes the same way as FourThirds. They have their APS-C cameras with EF-s lenses. Their mirrorless will also be APS-C, and they make an adapter for "legacy" EF-s and EF glass. Eventually though they will have a set of lenses ("micro" EF-s) that are more compact (using the shorter register).
I wouldn't give too much about measuring dimensions from the patent drawing. After all patents try to be as vague as possible, covering everything and revealing nothing.
douglasf13 wrote:
I'd bet that Canon stuffing a 35mm sensor into this alleged camera is about as likely as Sony stuffing a 35mm sensor in NEX, or m4/3 stuffing an aps-c sensor in their cameras. Unlikely.
A bit off-topic, but the 35mm width of 135 film includes the perforated parts above and below the frame -- this measurement obviously doesn't apply to FF sensors. Just "full frame" is a better word for a 24x36mm sensor.
freaklikeme wrote:
For all we know, the lens adapter patent was filed in anticipation of a new video camera, maybe an updated XL-HD using an APS-C CMOS chip. That's where Sony and Panasonic can threaten Canon. As much as I'd love to see what they come up with, I don't think Canon's going to jump in the mirrorless wonder business anytime soon.
++
I'd put money on this being for video before anything else.
