// This is the email I received about a potential Canon APS-H 1.3x mirrorless camera: "Canon APS-H 1.3x mirrorless I was talking with a friend of mine who often tests EOS cameras, that I can't wait any longer to buy my first mirrorless system but in the same time that am not satisfied with the IQ [...]"/>

Canon APS-H 1.3x mirrorless

By PR admin | Published: June 9, 2010

This is the email I received about a potential Canon APS-H 1.3x mirrorless camera:

"Canon APS-H 1.3x mirrorless
I was talking with a friend of mine who often tests EOS cameras, that I can't wait any longer to buy my first mirrorless system but in the same time that am not satisfied with the IQ of any of the available offers (M4/3, NEX …etc)! He said "if IQ is what you want then maybe you should wait just a little bit longer". What do you mean?! I asked. "Canon will soon be launching an APS-H mirrorless camera" he said. APS-C you must've meant?!. "No it's 1.3x" he insisted. That's likely to be heavier, bulkier and more expensive then the competition, I commented. "Not really, the size & weight aren't any higher than Panasonic G1/GH1". The price could be comparable to xxD, he is guessing based on the build quality & features of the almost-finalized version he tested.

Why would Canon use an APS-H sensor in that upcoming camera but not in the seemingly more demanding 7D class? I asked my friend. He thinks the main reason 7D didn't get APS-H is that Canon already has two lines of SLR lenses and doesn't want to add a third one to solve the UWA problem of 1.3x, but for mirrorless they have to introduce a new line of lenses anyway so the sensor can be any size. And Canon chose the APS-H according to my friend because of the following:

  1. They think that APS-C in general and their 1.6x (versus others' 1.5x) in particular is becoming increasingly difficult to improve on, update after update.
  2. Sensor production costs have fallen and there isn't much difference between 1.6x and 1.3x for Canon.
  3. Canon develop a new 1.3x sensor for the 1D series every few years and no other camera shared the R&D cost with the 1D before, but this time round the 16MP sensor of 1D4 will have a new use.
  4. Weight and size can be taken care of by design. So a larger sensor does not necessarily mean a heavier and bulkier package than the competition."

Related posts:

  1. Canon still wondering about mirrorless cameras
  2. Canon EIS mirrorless camera
  3. Canon expected to announce their mirrorless camera on July 23th
  4. Rumor: Canon EOS 650D and new mirrorless camera to be announced next month
  5. First Canon mirrorless camera specs

This entry was posted in Canon and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://www.earthrisephotography.com Earthrise

    Interesting, very interesting :-)

  • Bogus

    This is bogus. No way would a Canon tester under NDA be this talkative or know this much. This has to be made up.

    And no way would Canon detract from the 1DmkIV by introducing another camera with the same sensor size

    • Just a Thought

      Take same physical chip. Reduce the number of parallel output channels – which will reduce throughput to say 5fps – would also reduce number of Digic processors.. Put a slightly different filter infront of it. Could claim 1.3x and say it is not the same as 1Dmk4. The 1Dmk4 would retain it’s class leading feature set while sharing the R&D costs with the Evil line. The 1Dmk5 would probably do away with 1.3x and be full frame (with DX crop mode ala Nikon) anyways to compete with Nikon’s top end. Moving the 1.3x chip to the Evil line would save that chip production line.

      If the Canon tester was talking to a personal friend, all things are possible. Canon’s problem is that the Canon Tester’s friend decided to share this with Photo Rumors. It is only logical that Canon has to compete in the Evil market and a 1.3 sensor would give it a marketing edge over deep pockets Sony..

      From many angles such a move would make sense for Canon and that’s why I tend to think this rumor is real. Time will tell.

      • http://www.earthrisephotography.com Earthrise

        Yep. Might also be an “official” leak to slow competitor sales. Plus, with pan-oly, Sony, and Samsung et al releasing consumer oriented cams there is no high level Evil out there yet. As always only time will tell. Photokina looks like being a good one this year!

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/michalrosa/ Michal

          Yeah right, exactly how many people who are potential EVIL buyers will read this and believe in this BS? 1, 2? Yeha, that’s gonna slow down the sales real good.

          • http://www.earthrisephotography.com Earthrise

            True, probably won’t affect sales.

        • who_cares

          @Earthrise

          The m43s aren’t very consumer oriented.
          Olympus (and even more Panasonic) have some very powerful cameras packed to the field.
          They are filled with photographers functions.
          Not at least the price range speaks for itself.

          Sony’s NEX is starting as consumer products.
          Opted to be slim and affordable.
          Also the user interface is as simplified as possible.
          Let’s see if there comes an higher grade model with hardware buttons and DSLR like menu – I yet doubt it.

          NX is not shaped up enough for me to judge, atm.
          Let’s see what the 2nd camera will be (and when it will come).
          I would put them between m43 and NEX.
          But maybe not to radical different from m43 to get the huge press as NEX does…

      • Richard

        Agreed!

        Providing volume for the sensor will allow Canon to spread the R&D costs out so that there will actually be MORE R&D MONEY available to continue development with their flagship sensor…advantage Canon (over everyone else).

        Doing this would differentiate the product from the 1D series enough and would be a game changer in the EVIL market. Again, advantage Canon.

        I simply do not think that Nikon would have the ability to respond to a move like this. Game, set and match to Canon in the upper end EVIL market.

    • Just a Thought

      Rumors was that the chip in a Nikon D2X was very similar to the one found in the D90. If that was true, then it would not be unprecedented that cameras of different price points can share same/similar components. Canon’s and Nikon’s newest (best) stuff goes into high end first and then tends to get migrated downward into the product mix. Increase production on anything, then you can spread R&D costs. US Automakers, as another example, have been doing this for years.

      • Random Guy

        actually, it wouldn’t be surprising cuz D90 is released such a long time after D2x is announced. And if you look at the Nikon’s product line, usually sensors with new-megapixel-counts get announced with a high-end camera, then a sensor of same size and mega pixel sensor would appear on the D300-series after a few quarters, then the D90-series, and now, the 5000 and 3000. The sensors probably gets phased step by step downwards like that, and as a consumer I see that as a benefit, cuz we get to enjoy the fruits of technological development =]

        • who_cares

          You are forgetting that these sensors are made by Sony.
          D90 and D300/D300s are for 100% sure.
          It still holds true that Sony develops them further.
          And that Sony (with it’s relatively low market share in DSLR) can not “hide” innovation on sensors from selling to Nikon.
          Also the micro lenses and the image processor chip is different for Sony and Nikon DSLRs.
          That is why the A900 has great dynamic but noise on high ISO and the D3X is the good middle way ;o)

          All in all the topic is much complexer than “camera B uses improved A’s sensor”…

    • spam

      “And no way would Canon detract from the 1DmkIV by introducing another camera with the same sensor size”

      Never heard about 1Ds vs 5D and 5D Mk II? Or 7D and 550D? Actually 1.3 crop is the only sensor size where they haven’t put a very similar sensor (same size and pixel count) in a smaller and cheaper body.

  • Privatedoc

    Utter Tosh & Piffle…….Canon do NOT test stuff this way, also…whole new range of lenses…….come on ! :-)

    • Anonymous

      lens with built-in zoom motor for video, that’s the new line of lenses that is why it fits on any sensor size.

    • Johan Krüger-Haglert

      Someone else mentioned designed with autofocus which works well with video.

      Another reason is that you have to redesign the lenses for the shorter flange distance anyway, or mount it at the same old distance and hence make no smaller cameras.

  • Peter

    Bull sh**… dog…

  • Mark

    All you have to do is look back at camera rumors/leak history and you’ll see that this is bullshit. “A-friend-who-is-a-tester-told-me” has never been the source for some reliable first time info. It’s always some Chinese forum leak and then the ball starts rolling. Maybe, and just maybe, this sort of info appears a couple of days before official announcements.

    Come on, Photorumors, take your reality pills before posting :)

  • mochapaulo

    Whatsoever…it is the most lovely rumors for Canon so far.

    At least, putting more pressure is not a bad idea. lol

  • Dan

    Is it a rebadged M8?

    • who_cares

      Leica’s M series is designed around keeping the mount.
      Some (actual most) Leica lenses are expansive.
      So this is way more important than it was to manufacturers like Canon, Minolta, Olympus or Nikon (even they kept backwards compatible) when switching to AF in the 80s.
      Canon does not have a lens line with short flange distance for EVIL.
      So they don’t need to care about backwards compatibility.

      With digital sensors it is important to have the light rays coming in on a angle close to 90°.
      (see telecentric design)
      To make this possible and to reduce the light loss, bigger mounts are used than it been with film cameras.
      At least for complete new designs, that is what I mean.
      Look how much space is around the 4/3s sensor.
      Oly could have not build f/2 zooms else.
      And Sony is doing the same with NEX.

      The Leica M9 uses micro lenses in the corners to reangle the light to the sensor a little.
      Works good with the class ic wide angle designs for M.
      But Telecentric lenses will suffer from this.

      So if Canon enters the EVIL market, they will bring an own design.

  • Bernard

    Rumors aside, I was reading a review of the 1D4 thinking what impact 1.3 would have on focal lengths and then spotted this today… For me a nice coincidence :-)

    It is obvious Canon have been sitting back on this stuff watching the market. Such comments can also get posted to test reaction. They may have missed the boat and are now rushing to market.

    If the new Pentax 645 (cropped digital) does well it could make Nikon and Canon reconsider that market. Don’t forget Canon hired a Italian designer to both design some EOS bodies and also do a Medium format mock up.

    We could see lenses with dedicated sensors soon. Sensor size optimized for the job in hand. The market will change slowly over time. Limits may be met forcing larger sensors to be pursued and sensors optomised for a given lens type and aplication. Some evidence of this approach already aparent in the market, even in the film days.

  • Catastrophile

    Bernard you sound a bit like Ricoh when they introduced their GXR system..

    What do you mean by:
    “We could see lenses with dedicated sensors soon. Sensor size optimized for the job in hand.”
    when we buy into a system, it is nice to be able to make whatever body+lens combination, you dont want to be restricted by certain sensors being not suitable for certain lenses. and looking at the existing systems, the only problem as far as sensor-lens relationship goes is that occasionally the lens performance is not good at the corners and you need to crop off a little bit, some old lenses don’t have poor resolving power for modern high MP sensors, their images look soft, otherwise pick any lens+body from Canon, Nikon, Olympus ..etc system and you’ll find that all combinations and permutations work fine.

    • Catastrophile

      “some old lenses don’t have ***good*** resolving power” I meant

  • Bernard

    Hi Catastrophile, don’t panic, it will not happen quickly. I am sure the systems we have now will live long. :-)

    There will always be niece products, you mentioned one. There are more in the medium format world.

    We are more likely to have choice in the future. Shutterless design could speed up the process of change and variety of designs and all in one concepts.

    Mamiya are able to launch a digital 6×7 today because there are people out their with lens investment. Canon and Nikon will not ditch you for similar reasons :-)

    Agree about old lenses. It is a great shame that the new ones are more biased for pure digital workflow. E.G Canon’s new 50mm L ditches the floating elements as they know a photog can fix barrel distortion on close shots in photo shop. Many of their newer lenses are sharper but have way more vignetting, again they must favour sharpness over vignette performance because they know it can be fixed post. Some new Nikon lenses have very bad barrel or pincushion. Even their primes. The zooms are all over the shop :-) It seems sharpness and I guess future and current in camera correction is all driving these changes.

    Some Japanese photographers prefer less anti reflection coating for portrait etc. The new Canon 85mm L has more anti reflection and a faster focus which is not needed, it could be argued the old lens is better for its intended purpose, but as that market is now full canon have tweaked for those that wanted different characteristics in the mark 2. There are lots of examples. Each lens has it’s strengths and weaknesses. Canon always said no such thing as a perfect lens.

  • rooky

    No may be the rumor is right BUT if so CANON will completely go wrong !!!

    Why ?

    To me the argument number one to LIVE (Lens Interchangeable Viewfinder Electronic) camera is : the smallest size possible with DSLR image quality !

    So in that way, SONY made an amazing design engineering with NEX models (incredible how small they are for APS-C sensor size). But where they are wrong too like CANON (if this rumor is OK) this is with the zoom lens size which are too much BIG due to picture circle APS-C sensor…
    YES the NEX camera + zoom are really too big !

    And CANON with 1.3x sensor will have its new zoom lenses line even BIGGER than SONY ! Sorry this is for me THE big mistake…
    pan_oly have may be the best compromise ever with their u4/3 sensor + zoom lenses. Just compare size of 14-140mm against 18-200mm…

    • http://www.earthrisephotography.com Earthrise

      Define DSLR image quality. It varies even within the Canon’s range. u4/3 does not give DSLR level IQ, better than P&S cameras yes, DSLR no.

      • Johan Krüger-Haglert

        Since all Olympus DSLRs have four-thirds sensors to then yes, definitely DSLR quality.

    • eec

      Leica lenses are not that big. And they are full frame.

    • Johan Krüger-Haglert

      Does the size of the zoom only depend on sensor size and not flange distance or lens design? Can’t it just be that the nex zoom ended up being big?

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/michalrosa/ Michal

    Sounds like absolute nonsense and a fanboi wet dream. Such camera would be very bulky and heavy negating any mirror-less weight and size savings. There are no dedicated –H lenses so it would have to use standard EF glass and flange distance would have to be the same as in the EOS cameras. I also doubt that there would be any significant cost savings with a large sensor, even getting rid of the mirror and the pentaprism would probably not bring the price down enough. Very, very unlikely rumour.

    • http://www.earthrisephotography.com Earthrise

      Not saying this rumour is even close to being true, but if Canon ever do introduce an EVIL then it has to come with a new lens mount and range otherwise it would be pointless introducing it. The would be adapters to EF and maybe EF-S.

      Why would such cameras be bulky? The NEX is hardly bulky with its APS-C. GH1 size sounds quite possible

      • Johan Krüger-Haglert

        Not to mention all the rangefinder camera from the film days. (For size that is.)

    • Johan Krüger-Haglert

      Why would it be bulky? Me personally would like as big sensor as possible in an EVIL.

      Flange distance would be the same regardless of whatever it was APS-C, APS-H or FF if you choose to only look at old lenses. But of course they would design the camera for a shorter flange distance and as such design new lenses for it. And hence it doesn’t matter that they have no APS-H designed lenses right NOW because they have to redo it anyway. In the meantime you could mount FF and eventually APS-C lenses with an adapter. For instance maybe they could let it auto-crop when you mounted an APS-C-lens to get rid of any vignetting.

  • Sanford

    I don’t believe Canon like to do this way. See how they classify their product – importand components of 1D series are VERY rarely used again on the lower class model. That is for protecting the sale of the top models. If Canon is so considering the sale of the 1D series, how come they will develop EVIL APS-H to compete with 1D mk IV? If they really want to make cheaper APS-H, why not do it with the 7D mark II ?

    From the track of the Canon EOS development, I believe they will still do the x1.6 APS-C EVIL instead – If they really like to develop EVIL.

  • Catastrophile

    Sanford wrote:
    “importand components of 1D series are VERY rarely used again on the lower class model”

    what about 5D2 sensor coming from 1Ds3 for example?

  • rooky

    Earthrise wrote :
    “Define DSLR Image Quality”

    Sorry for this late answer (away from web) but DSLR IQ is to me “good” quality till 800iso and “acceptable” at 1600iso which really allow a complete new usage of taking photo compare to argentic !
    Yes I know it is really subjective and every people have its own threshold but compare to compact sensor, 4/3 sensor is what I call DSLR IQ ;-)
    (See luminous Landscape web site with g11 vs GF1 to go deeper…)
    Of course bigger sensor (bigger photosites) will be better but sufficiant to me and better compromise ever (all size material) 4/3 sensors are !

    And LEICA lenses are not so big YES may be but most are prime lenses not ZOOMs…

    So my dreaming LIVE camera system, if CANON can hear me ;-) is :
    - Sony NEX body but with stabilization inside
    - PANASONIC AF quick system
    - Olympus u4/3 lenses size but with also more premium and fast lenses (f:2 or faster)
    - builtin Electronic viewfinder

    And to succeed in this, competitor has to “create” a new sensor (why not a square 20x20mm) with new dedicated lens line (goal is to obtain smallest possible)

    WOW ! What a dream !?!

  • Back to top