With an almost APS-C sized sensor and a non-removable lens: http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/01/cano ... t=FaceBook 14.3MP
That would make the use of the word "mirrorless" somewhat misleading. ; Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
i just read the topic again... ; i do believe roger was trying to sneak in a little sarcasm. ; missed that one the first time through.
Just a bit. However, there is a ring of truth in it. ; http://translate.google.com/translate?s ... 02756.html http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/12/thou ... ns-camera/ The second link is more telling...CR's summary is : "Does a mirrorless camera really need interchangeable lenses?" The translation of the interview is off at times but it sounds like Canon's opinion is that most people don't change lenses so why even give them the option? ; However they later go on and say they need to prove why interchangeable is good and how a Canon system would have to use a new mount. ; (it won't be EOS) ; On a side note I think Canon may have shot themselves in the foot by making EF-S lenses that protrude into the mount, it's going to make a new mount a little harder to use legacy lenses....
Maybe instead of mirrorless the term should be: ; larger sensor compact cameras Sigma actually started it with the DP-1. ; Fuji just made it cool with the X-100 - a larger sensor compact camera with a fixed prime lens. ; They gave the X-10 a zoom. ; But every manufacturer has figured out that a new mount is necessary, with Sony and m4/3 not changing the size of the sensors underneath.[nb]Kind of ignoring Samsung[/nb] ; Pentax and Nikon used smaller sensors in theirs.
