rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Keen

What would be the point? Supposedly, the main reason for using mirrorless, is that it is allegedly smaller, and lighter weight. If you then add a mirror / prism / housing unit to a mirrorless camera, it is no longer smaller, or lighter weight, than a regular DSLR. You may as well buy a DSLR to begin with. Are there that many photogs out there who are anxious to make their mirrorless rigs bigger, and heavier?

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

The speculation I’ve seen is that there are some use-cases where the photographer can claim MILC is a disadvantage. This crazy device would allow Canon to support those users without manufacturing any actual complete DSLR’s.

bpulv Loc: Buena Park, CA

This sounds and looks more like an April Fools joke than reality! To think that there would be a market for this big enough to offset the development cost on its surface sounds at best like a really bad business decision.

Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL

Wasn't there a reflex housing developed for Leica rangefinder cameras? I think it was called the 'Visoflex."

bpulv Loc: Buena Park, CA

That's true, but that was in pre-Leicaflex days and as I remember, most people used it for macro or microscopic photography and not for everyday shooting as we do with a regular SLR. It was an attempt to make the rangefinder cameras backward compatible at a time that Leica did not have a SLR on the market. It sounds like Canon is doing the opposite; i.e., trying to make a camera backward compatible at a time when they DO have DSLRs on the market. If Canon were to discontinue all DSLR production, there would still be thousands of DSLRs available for decades that people would buy. The strategy just does not make sense.