Sometimes, you have to leave old technology in the dust to move forward. With two of the biggest brands having just announced new mirrorless bodies, with it comes new lens mounts to carry these camera systems into the future.
Canon has done this once before in recent memory. In 1987, it dumped its FD mount system of lenses and cameras to go all electronic with the EF mount, a decision that angered many photographers with FD mount lens collections. However, it proved to be the right decision, as Canon made great strides with its autofocus using the new mount.
Nikon took a different approach, retrofitting electronic functions to its F-mount, which hit the scene in 1959. While initially slow to catch up to Canon in autofocus, that’s proven to be a non-issue in recent history.
But now both companies appear to be throwing all of that goodwill built up in these systems out the window.
Figuring It All Out
In teaching photography, one of the most common problems I came across was students who misunderstood what lenses would work on their camera. It’s not as easy as saying if you have a Nikon, buy a Nikon lens, or if you have a Canon, buy a Canon. Oftentimes, students with a lower model Nikon would get disappointed when they realize that 50mm f/1.8D lens they just got a good deal on won’t autofocus on their D3400. It’s a bit esoteric to explain to someone just learning how shutter speeds work about how some lenses need a focus motor in the camera body just to focus. It’s a similar situation with Canon, when a lens with a white dot can’t be hooked up to the 6D that someone just upgraded to. Then you have to get into a conversation about sensor sizes when you should really be talking about composition.
The new mounts from both manufacturers exacerbates the problem. Instead of just picking up a camera to use, you’ll have to figure out how to get the right lens on it.
Let’s take a look at Nikon’s side with the release of the Z6/Z7 mirrorless models. Up to this point, most everything F-mount has always worked to some varying degree on most of Nikon’s offerings. That varying degree, however, is quite a wide range. Some lenses won’t focus on some bodies, some won’t meter correctly, and then some won’t work at all (for instance, if you look at a workhorse lens like the AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR, you’re out of luck if you want to use that on your D200 or D3000, or even a professional model in the D2-series of cameras). To this you add a new mount (the Z) and an adapter which will have its own compatible lens list. That said, that Nikon was able to maintain any compatibility over the years with the same lens mount while dragging it kicking and screaming into 2018 is a miracle of engineering in its own right.
Canon has had a few different variations of the EF mount over the years.
None of the adapters from Canon appear to be compatible with EF-M lenses, which means a potentially orphaned system a la the Nikon 1. Or it could be a hard split between consumer and professional lines, depending on how you look at it.
Either way, all of those choices are enough to make your head spin, but is it enough to scare away beginning photographers from buying an interchangeable lens camera entirely?
Canon and Nikon are hoping that’s not the case. What do you think?
Know that google exists in every 20 year olds pocket people should be able to figure out which lenses go with with cameras. I love that I can mount pretty much any lens ever made to my sony with the right adapter.
It's not so straight-forward. For instance, if I go to the Nikon FTZ adapter page on their site, there's a link to check the lens compatibility at the bottom. Instead of bringing you to a specific list of compatible lenses, it brings you to a full list of all of their lenses, with a bunch of footnotes at the bottom and nothing FTZ-specific. What's someone supposed to make of that?
maybe you should just wait the availability of the device and accessories before moaning and crying 'it is too complicated', don't you ?
If adapters and lenses compatibilty list it too difficult to understand for a 'photographer', maybe he should stick to its iPhone and let theses expensives toys at the selling point, too dangerous for their brains, granted !
It won't be confusing for anyone who knows their gear, and who knows how to properly research stuff before spending hard-earned money. Yeah it's a bit weird at first, but its only a mistake you make once. If that.
What is with the title of this article??? I understand the premiss, but that is terrible writing. "Canon, Nikon's"???? How about just using "Canon and Nikon's"? Is it that hard?
I'm an old newspaper guy, this is pretty much what all newspapers do. If I had to get technical about it, I suppose it was because back in the days of print newspapers space was at a premium so that's why the style developed.
"...but is it enough to scare away beginning photographers from buying an interchangeable lens camera entirely?"
I disagree with that comment. If you are a beginner, you have the opportunity for a greenfield start with one system or the other. As a teacher, I would think that your emphasis would be on the required technical and artistic skills to be a good photographer. That applies to any camera system. For me, I have a complete Canon DSLR system built around the 5DSR which I love and a host of high quality EF Lenses. The problem for me is should I scrap the DSLR and switch to mirror less? When I read the comments, it's always a bunch of photo-nerds talking about the "technicals" rather than technique. My take is that a mirror less system will not make me a better photographer. If I want to improve my photography, my time and money is best spent on skill improvement. So, I will stay with DSLR until someone can persuade me that mirror less will help my photography.
I struggle to understand what the author of this article wants to say. That new mounts are all wrong? Or rather visionary? And why 3 different converters by Canon are wrong? I think it is fantastic. Once there will be enough of RF lenses, one might even use some of the existing EF glass each with an own converter attached, because the basic converter is so affordable. I hope that in the future Nikon would provide a DTZ converter for D-lenses, because I still have a bunch of them. Note that Tom Hogan made a great write-up about all variants of Nikon F mount, and also says that the FTZ converter does have in fact a motor to actuate the aperture ring. Canon converters are all electronic, what would explain the circular form and lower price.
One interesting observation about Canon's RF has been made on Canon News: because EOS-M has 18mm flange distance, and RF has 20mm, there will be no RF-to-EOS-M converters. These both families of lenses will be totally disjoint. Here Sony has potentially made a better technical solution, because the E and EF lenses both use the same mount. Owner of a A6xxx camera can use the full-frame glass, as we can similarly on any APS-C/DX Canon/Nikon body. Canon EOS-M is now orphaned in respect to EOS-RF.
There is just no question: canon has a disaster in the making far more than any company. Not only can EOS-M never enjoy any of those modern R lenses, you cannot invest in full frame R gear going forward. It may not be such a problem for few M users will be buying the 3 thousand dollar f/2 zoom and the 2200 dollar 50mm which canon determined were "must have" to start with. But want to buy that 35 1.8 or the f/4 zoom which are more competitively priced? Yes, you can invest on the full frame gear now and then just step into those more fancy lenses later...if you're Nikon/sony that is :)
So you're stuck. Buy any EF-M lens and you will basically write it off because it will not even work in crop mode! Buy any EF-R lens and you may as well use it as a door stop because it won't mount on your M camera. What a mess!
Man, If an unfrozen caveman photographer such as myself can figure this out, I bet newbies will be ok.
I feel like the quality of many articles on fstoppers are going down day by day. The other day I saw an article cribbing about why mirrorless cameras were brought in when lens sizes are the same !!!
And then I came upon this article. Instead of writing something useful, writers are spending their time is creating an issue of nothing. As this is a forum where photo enthusiasts join to learn phorography, such confusing articles that create more of a hoax than truth should not be posted.
If someone is spending $2000 on a camera body, the person should know clearly what he's jumping into. If the person is buying it not understanding he cannot use it with existing F mount lenses without the FTZ adapter, it is like buying a TV and then complaining i didnt know i have to have a cable or net connection to watch something on it. Would you blame the TV manufacturer? And the argument that Nikon's website doesn't say which lenses are compatible with FTZ adapter is baseless. Anyone who has an extremely old lens may call Nikon and check, but this is a very specific scenario.
I don't think mounting confusion will frustrate even 5% of existing customers. If it does, the problem is with the customers, not with Nikon or Canon. Technology enhancements are bound to come and we should applaud the new mounts that are bigger which allows better lenses to be built. Not spread a false impression that it is complicated and confusing.
Sorry about being blunt but we all hold a responsibility of making these hugely popular forums spread the correct awareness.
No big deal.
I get really impressed with these articles - texts that try to mask the Canon problems by saying the same problems being Nikon's. They are not. The differences of the Z6 and Z7 in terms of videos, dynamic range image quality, camera body stabilization, Canon lenses that need to have stabilization, are thousands of miles apart.
DSLR'S aren't going to disappear overnight now that both companies have FF Mirrorless cameras. Personally I would like to see a D850 body with the Fmount as mirrorless. I don't care about a .95 lens. I am sure Nikon and Canon are going to continue to make F mount and EF mount lenses and bodies for years to come. Mirrorless isn't a new division of each company they just have a new offering to cater to more customers. I hope they incorporate some of the features from mirrorless into dslr's.
Just don't go out and buy a lens randomly at a swap meet and you won't be frustrated. In the a age of Google and YouTube there is no excuse for ignorance. Even then there is nothing stopping you from going to a local camera store and having a chat with the salespeople.
I must admit, I honestly don't see the big deal with mirrorless, and I don't see them replacing professional dSLRs anytime soon. The only benefit they offer is slightly smaller size (and weight). But these benefits are easily negated once you use a 105mm or larger lens, because at that point, the lens is carrying most of the weight, so the ergonomics of the body play a bigger role. The drawbacks are significantly shorter battery life, and lack of dual card memory card slots, which are important for some photographers.
I can see mirrorless being the camera of choice for street, documentary, photo reportage and travel, but not wedding/sports shooters who work with longer focal lengths, and for whom battery life is king.
I know many enthusiasts disagree, and strongly believe they'll replace all professional dSLRs. As a professional photographer myself, I just don't see that happening.
Using both mirrorless and DSLR, I think for me the biggest advantage is the focusing done on the sensor, and this is for two reasons - it means the end of microadjusting lenses (I hate doing this with a passion) and it means that you can more easily nail shots wide open, which is hard at something like f/1.2 when using a conventional DSLR. The problem to this point is that continuous focusing on mirrorless, even on the high-models, still doesn't touch what a mid- to high-end DSLR can do in the extreme cases (I'm talking about sports photography, which is what I often end up doing). That these new Z6/Z7/R models push the envelope in that arena and then portend future advances in this technology is very exciting news indeed.
It wasn't long ago that I was using the following camera systems for work: Sinar system (F, P & X - 4x5"), Hasselblad 500C/M system (6x6), Fuji GX680 system (6x8), Linhof Master Technika system (4x5"), Nikon system & Noblex 135 & Pro 175 (fixed lens).
In the freezer we kept:
- Fuji FP100C & FP100C45 instant film
- Fujichrome Provia 100 (135, 120 and 4x5" formats)
- Fujichrome Velvia 50 (135, 120 and 4x5" formats)
- Fujichrome T64 (135, 120 and 4x5" formats)
- Kodak Ektachrome 160T (120 and 4x5" formats)
- Various colour & B/W negative films
I'm finding it a bit difficult to understand what is so confusing with today's systems...
Didn't Canon JUST release some EF lenses recently: 85mm f/1.4L, 70-200mm f/4L II and 70-200mm f/2.8L III? As I took the plunge on the 85mm f/1.4, can I expect that decision to be made a bad one in short order? With this mindset, one has to wonder if this is the end of EF camera production especially with another "dump" on the horizon.
If the adapters are as good as billed, I'd imagine there's still a lot of life left in the EF mount (also given the similar size of the mounts). I'd be more worried as an F-mount user since the new Z-mount is a huge upgrade over the old F-mount, but who knows - maybe these adapters will surprise everyone.
Even if this is the sunset for the EF system, the cameras and lenses you've got will work as well as they always have, and Canon supports their cameras with service for a decent number of years before you can't get them fixed any more.
I'll pick up the new Canon with the adapter for my existing lenses and give it a shot. Should I find over the next year that I use it more than my 5D3, I'll probably slowly convert.
D200? D2-series?
D2X still rocking it at 12 mp, not too bad for today. I also have a D2H that, while it still works, is not really in my regular rotation of cameras.
I've known for a long time this day was coming. I have never been that blown away at the idea of mirrorless. It was easy to see the attraction... size, weight, no mirror flapping, etc. When you're old school like me those things are not that important. Moreover, I'm a big dude so the smaller the body the more difficult it is for me to hold. My thinking is pretty straight forward. If you have tons of disposable cash, and you "want" the new stuff, by all means go get it. If you're brand new to photography, I think I would see the writing on the wall and start with the mirrorless, now. If you're more like myself and many of the photographers I shoot with and have a lifetime of investment in the new/old glass, just don't worry about it. Wait until a few versions of the mirrorless have worked through the issues new tech always has, then slowly migrate over. Also, more and more lenses will be hitting the market in time and maybe the next lens I "really need" will be available in Z mount, and that might be the time to pick up that THIRD body.
This article is older but a point needs to be made.
All EF and EFS lenses are 100% compatible with the new RF mount.
Therefore absolutely none of your EF lenses are orphaned. In fact with the control ring adapter they actually gain new functions. Also they generally focus more accurately and faster on a RF mount body vs an old EF body.
Vs Nikon which really made obsolete a huge portion of AF lenses as the new S mount adapter will not allow lenses without a motor to AF on any new Z body.
Also the new Canon RF mount allows for manual focus lenses like the Canon FD, FL and R to now mount on the RF mount bodies and you can even mount the very old Leica thread Canon rangefinder lenses on the RF mount bodies with simple adapters and no trouble focusing to infinity as no extra glass element is needed in the adapter. And with IBIS coming to the RF mount Canons your old Manual focus Canon lenses will become incredibly useful. So grab them on Ebay wile they are still affordable.