Canon is actively conducting market research on a “retro” style camera body
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I still have my FTb bodies and love the way they look. The AE-1 is very similar, so that’s the one I’d pick. One change I would make is adding a little more grip. Today’s lenses are often much larger and heavier than what we used in the old days. Or what we could afford to use, anyway! Need better grip now.
Upvote
0
Voting for Canon P with EVF or OVF hybrid. The QL17 has too boxy corners. Also since Nikon came out with ZF, Canon would be pulling a "Me Too" with a SLR-like retro mirrorless, which they seem loathe to do.
I would hope Canon sticks with full frame IBIS for this, come out with FD-RF mount adapters, and make focus guide available on all types of manual lenses. Better yet, come out with some modern day RF mount manual focus lenses themselves to match. That would open so much possibilities!
I would hope Canon sticks with full frame IBIS for this, come out with FD-RF mount adapters, and make focus guide available on all types of manual lenses. Better yet, come out with some modern day RF mount manual focus lenses themselves to match. That would open so much possibilities!
Upvote
0
But the original F-1 or the New F-1? This post shows the latter. Anyway I see little use for a SLR vintage body style - but nostalgia. Making a compact rangefinder-like body is IMHO more interesting - not much because of the vintage look, but because of the form factor.
I still own my A-1, and sometimes use it - but the ergonomics was good for its times - and it was one of the first camera having a dial you could move easily while looking in the viewfinder. Yet, now if they can make a camera small and light as the A-1 is (and the FD lenses too) compared to my 5D...
Upvote
0
How about instead of everybody commenting what they'd like to see, we just have a poll here at CR.
I´m not among those who'd like a "retro" camera because ergonomically they're a mess imho, but I'd love to see what retro fans would like to have/ buy.
I´m not among those who'd like a "retro" camera because ergonomically they're a mess imho, but I'd love to see what retro fans would like to have/ buy.
Upvote
0
Canon does need some continuity across the EOS R lineup. Hopefully the next generation of cameras will settle Canon into an ergonomic philosophy.
Upvote
0
F-1 since it has the little grippy. But didn't the AE-1 have an accessory grip?
Upvote
0
I would buy this so fast, Canon has more small sized lenses than the Nikon ZF has currently at its disposal (16/24/35/50 and kinda 85) along with those more compact slower kit lenses, so it would make so much sense on a body like this. I've spent years imaging a digital AE-1 (my first film camera).
Upvote
0
I am still happy, that Luigi Colani was setting the basis of the modern ergonomic camera design and ergonomics with the Canon T90.
I don't need vintage ergonomics
But I am happy for all of you doing this.
I don't need vintage ergonomics
But I am happy for all of you doing this.
Upvote
0
I completely agree with you on the AE styling. Many of these now-retro cameras have a certain allure to them. I have a Minolta SRT-102 that was used by an uncle during his deployment in the mid-late 70's. I used it for a short time until deciding to simply preserve the camera. I just feel different when shooting with a retro or retro style camera. It truly does slow down the process, but in a good way. The X100V does the same for me, and apparently many others. It's kind of a back to basics approach that is refreshing.
I think the retro-camera popularity is similar to how people lust after classic cars. I drove a '65 Shelby Cobra a few years ago. The ride, handling, and power were laughable compared to the modern vehicle I owned. I still would have loved to add it to my garage. There is definitely a strong psychological component involved, but you experience driving in a unique way that isn't possible, for whatever reason, with modern cars.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
I'm with clearwaterphotog. I've admired Nikon for doing this, but I'm not interested in a 24megapixel body. I want whatever the latest sensor technology is. If they produce a somewhat F1 body I'll wish for it, but if it has R5 level technology I'll probably buy it, because I'll be able to use it.
Upvote
0
No way you could manufacture such a thing today and sell it for the $549 that will get you a mint one on eBay. (I sold mine a week after getting my 1-Ds MkI in 2002... the pro shooter was so happy to get one for only $2000, and didn't think digital would amount to much.)
Upvote
0
I actually used both the Contax G2 outfit (28, 45, 90) and the Leica M6 (35/1.4, 74/1.4) a lot in the 90s. I could see utility in a re-issue of the QL14, actually, which was a rangefinder with a fixed 50/1.4. Except I might make it a 45 or 40/1.4. Give it a seriously nice sensor and it could be my back-pack camera instead of the R5+50/1.4+16/2.8 I carry now. Is anyone making a camera like that today? I think Leica had the "Q" or something with a fixed 28/2.8 which I get, but still is just too wide for me.
Upvote
0
An APS-C sensor in a QL17 like body with the 28mm f2.8 would be a great compact kit and the field of view would be quite similar to the QL17 GIII. I’d be fine if it was basically an R10 in a different body but I wouldn’t say no to IBIS for an additional markup.
Upvote
0
I have the F1n, it was my camera for many years until the AF and EF glass came. however, I would rather spend my (not so big) saving to own R1.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
