Sony Alpha NEX-3n
While researching and purchasing unique, inexpensive lenses from all over the world I kept running across these little 16mm cine lenses which utilize a C-Mount, and while EOS adapters are made for them, the depth of the sensor only allows for macro photography - which is one of the many reasons "mirrorless" (and 4/3 cameras) are so adaptable with older cinema and rangefinder lenses - their sensor is much closer to the flange, recreating old non-SLR film cameras. Additionally, my old Minolta lenses cannot be adapted to Canon because the rear-element extends too far into the camera, causing the mirror to hit the back of the lens rendering it ineffective. Those old Minolta lenses can, however, be adapted for these mirrorless cameras.
While I've been thinking about those cheap, 16mm cine lenses for awhile now, I'd only recently considered picking up a mirrorless camera. I really didn't want another gun in my arsenal, especially due to the stupidly overpriced G1X I almost never use; sitting there underappreciated. But when I found a brand-new-in-box NEX-3n on clearance for fully half off, I decided to see if I could at least turn it into a tax write-off after some sage advice from GF who's owned her own business now for 8 years.
The NEX-3n incorporates a similar APS-C "crop" sensor, which is slightly larger than Canon's APS-C spec. A nice comparative graphic here: http://cameradecision.com/compare/Canon-EOS-100D-vs-Sony-Alpha-NEX-3N. The thing is, many of these cheap cine lenses are f/1.4 which I have a difficult time finding inexpensively (I only have one, a Pentax-M Asahi SMC I haven't written a review on) and then only in 50mm. So these cine lenses come very wide in a great range of focal lengths.
I need another camera like I need a hole in the head, but maybe something will come of this?
Sensor depth differences