So the new release is fascinating to me, if only from a curiosity standpoint. I have no use for a small mirrorless camera, so the point is moot. Personally I have a cell phone for casual shots (that's surprisingly good), and a 5DIII setup for professional work. I really have no desire for anything in between, especially at $800+.
I wandered over to DPReview and took a look at the comments section for this camera. They are famously known as a group of incessant whiners, so I shouldn't be surprised they hated the camera. However the intensity of the disdain kind of took me by surprise.
Why all the hate?
From my point of view, this camera hits the mark. They put a large sensor in the smallest body possible. It's not so much a camera anymore as it is a "control center" to be mounted onto the back of a lens of your choice. Want something larger with an optical viewfinder and lots of buttons? They have a fine T4i for you.
At this point there is really something for just about everyone... yet people do nothing but complain. You'd think we had no way to take any good pictures at all.
So what do you think? Good move by Canon or did they miss the mark? Why?
I am interested as I can use my existing lenses. I wish it wasn't quite as expensive, but that's likely to change. I am most lilely to use it with the kit lens or the 40mm. I am assuming the kit lens is going to be as good as the 40 buy f/2 - it'll be great.
I might have liked a viewfinder for bright sunny conditions.
My only complaint is that it doesn't have a built-in flash. Having to carry a flash that doubles the camera size kind of defeats the purpose of having a tiny camera.
I understand it's the same proven money-making strategy that the micro 4/3 manufacturers used, coming out with a body with no flash and then adding it on later models as a bonus, but it still sucks for us consumers that Canon chose to follow their paths.
No camera can be all cameras but that doesn't stop all the people who expect something for nothing to complain that it doesn't have their favourite feature at a below rock-bottom price.
Rickuz wrote:
I hate it because it is not the Canon-version of Leica M9, that I had hoped for.
However, I will hate it in silence and wait for Canon to release a mirrorless FF. (Or Nikon or Sony).
Canon doesn't seem to be interested in chasing low-profit niche areas of the market. An M9 is $7000. The Canon version might be half that... and people would still whine about it and not buy the thing.
deepbluejh wrote:
So the new release is fascinating to me, if only from a curiosity standpoint. I have no use for a small mirrorless camera, so the point is moot. Personally I have a cell phone for casual shots (that's surprisingly good), and a 5DIII setup for professional work. I really have no desire for anything in between, especially at $800+.
I wandered over to DPReview and took a look at the comments section for this camera. They are famously known as a group of incessant whiners, so I shouldn't be surprised they hated the camera. However the intensity of the disdain kind of took me by surprise.
Why all the hate?
From my point of view, this camera hits the mark. They put a large sensor in the smallest body possible. It's not so much a camera anymore as it is a "control center" to be mounted onto the back of a lens of your choice. Want something larger with an optical viewfinder and lots of buttons? They have a fine T4i for you.
At this point there is really something for just about everyone... yet people do nothing but complain. You'd think we had no way to take any good pictures at all.
So what do you think? Good move by Canon or did they miss the mark? Why?...Show more →
Some people are happy. It's pretty much what I expected, but with a better sensor so I'm just sort of so-so on the thing...
As to the problems and objections...There seems to be many so where to begin?
+2 OK, so they made a small camera and put a decent sensor in it. Great..
-3 They gave it a ridiculous price. Canon has gotten stupid, but enough said.
-1 They left off controls - using the menu is not exactly a fluid operation.
-2 They left off the VF option, so you have the worst feature of today's P&S cameras, namely holding the camera at arms length to compose. Personally, I hate that...
-1 Has EF support, but at $200?
This vs. Sony. Sony wins easily.
This vs Oly. Oly wins easily.
Add the points together and it's -5. Beginner camera. Expensive. No sale..
I like it, and think it has good potential. What other mirrorless system will mount EF and EF-S lenses with AF and IS compatibility?
I can see little things like no EVF or pop-up flash, but those are very minor to me, having been using some m4/3 that are the same, but unable to use my Canon EF/EF-S lenses. Like everyone, I'd like the price to come down a bit, as I'm sure it will over time.
I like the concept of it being the lens "control center".
Stunnaz wrote:
My only complaint is that it doesn't have a built-in flash. Having to carry a flash that doubles the camera size kind of defeats the purpose of having a tiny camera.
I understand it's the same proven money-making strategy that the micro 4/3 manufacturers used, coming out with a body with no flash and then adding it on later models as a bonus, but it still sucks for us consumers that Canon chose to follow their paths.
My situation may be different than most... but I haven't owned a camera with an integrated flash in probably 8 years - and I can't say I've missed it.
Why add $20 to the cost of a camera to add an (almost) worthless flash?
Stunnaz wrote:
My only complaint is that it doesn't have a built-in flash. Having to carry a flash that doubles the camera size kind of defeats the purpose of having a tiny camera.
I understand it's the same proven money-making strategy that the micro 4/3 manufacturers used, coming out with a body with no flash and then adding it on later models as a bonus, but it still sucks for us consumers that Canon chose to follow their paths.
But the flash ships WITH the kit , so it's not exactly a money making strategy.
What it does give you is the chance to put a better flash on there as well. Yes the size is increased a lot but let's face it the buit in flashes on most compact sized bodies are pretty pointless .
As for the camera itself. It looks a good effort. I will agree the price looks heavy but let's wait and see.
deepbluejh wrote:
So the new release is fascinating to me, if only from a curiosity standpoint. I have no use for a small mirrorless camera, so the point is moot. Personally I have a cell phone for casual shots (that's surprisingly good), and a 5DIII setup for professional work. I really have no desire for anything in between, especially at $800+.
I wandered over to DPReview and took a look at the comments section for this camera. They are famously known as a group of incessant whiners, so I shouldn't be surprised they hated the camera. However the intensity of the disdain kind of took me by surprise.
Why all the hate?
From my point of view, this camera hits the mark. They put a large sensor in the smallest body possible. It's not so much a camera anymore as it is a "control center" to be mounted onto the back of a lens of your choice. Want something larger with an optical viewfinder and lots of buttons? They have a fine T4i for you.
At this point there is really something for just about everyone... yet people do nothing but complain. You'd think we had no way to take any good pictures at all.
So what do you think? Good move by Canon or did they miss the mark? Why?...Show more →
I'm with you Jamie...I don't really have an interest in this type of camera (or I would already have owned one of the many choices already available) but I think the specs on this exceed what I would have expected from Canon in an initial release. Historically, Canon has never (or extremely rarely) put out a 'first model' with a full range of features so I did not expect this one to be any different...but it does seem to have a good feature selection and with a 1.6 crop sensor as a big bonus. Sure it's not a perfect camera for everyone (but then, what is?) but trhe amount of derision has really surprised me. It is basically a mirrorless T4i without the pop-up flash & viewfinder and it's compatible with all current EOS 'stuff'...as an initial offering, I think it's pretty good actually. I might even have some future interest in this as a vacation/travel camera. I recently purchased the 40mm to use on my 5D just for that purpose and I LOVE it...so an even more compact version might be even better for me...just sayin'.
jamesf99 wrote:
Canon has gotten stupid, but enough said.
Oh boy, here we go again. The stable profitable 75 year old company is "stupid". Do you think they will fold their photography division next year for lack of sales and lack of profits and lack of world class cameras? Are you agreed with skibum5 that Canon doesn't have any people on staff who actually make photographs?
In my case I've never used pop-up flash, harsh light to use. Even on OM-D I put FL-600R not even a smaller external FL-300R.
Stunnaz wrote:
My only complaint is that it doesn't have a built-in flash. Having to carry a flash that doubles the camera size kind of defeats the purpose of having a tiny camera.
I understand it's the same proven money-making strategy that the micro 4/3 manufacturers used, coming out with a body with no flash and then adding it on later models as a bonus, but it still sucks for us consumers that Canon chose to follow their paths.
jamesf99 wrote:
Some people are happy. It's pretty much what I expected, but with a better sensor so I'm just sort of so-so on the thing...
As to the problems and objections...There seems to be many so where to begin?
+2 OK, so they made a small camera and put a decent sensor in it. Great..
-3 They gave it a ridiculous price. Canon has gotten stupid, but enough said.
-1 They left off controls - using the menu is not exactly a fluid operation.
-2 They left off the VF option, so you have the worst feature of today's P&S cameras, namely holding the camera at arms length to compose. Personally, I hate that...
-1 Has EF support, but at $200?
This vs. Sony. Sony wins easily.
This vs Oly. Oly wins easily.
Add the points together and it's -5. Beginner camera. Expensive. No sale..
The way I see it, the ONLY value of this camera is for using existing EF lenses. If you have no desire to use EF lenses, then feel free to buy into another system and buy a completely new set of lenses.
As for the OV, I feel like integrating a decent one into a camera about the size of a deck of cards would have been a losing proposition. The VF would either be terrible, or it would be too big (which would put it into different territory) Besides, am I the only one who thinks holding something that tiny to your face to compose a picture is kind of ridiculous?
Pricing is on the high side, yes. Typical of Canon products designed in the past few years. Blame the skyrocketing price of the Yen for this.
As for the "beginner camera" line, I suspect you are dead wrong here. This will be an advanced body, in what is a deceptively small package.
It will be interesting to see if canon bring out an underwater housing for it. Olympus have for a couple of the pen series.
I think the canon m could make a pretty good holiday dive/snorkel cam .
I just think they could have made it a lot better, but like Nikon they have too much to lose from their low-end SLRs. It does give them an opening to add more though.
Olympus and Sony would seem to have them beat hands down here as they are at least committed to delivering the best they can rather than this marketing compromise.
Richie S wrote:
I just think they could have made it a lot better, but like Nikon they have too much to lose from their low-end SLRs. It does give them an opening to add more though.
Olympus and Sony would seem to have them beat hands down here as they are at least committed to delivering the best they can rather than this marketing compromise.
It's already priced higher than their low end DSLRs, so that argument goes out the window.
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
But the flash ships WITH the kit , so it's not exactly a money making strategy.
What it does give you is the chance to put a better flash on there as well. Yes the size is increased a lot but let's face it the buit in flashes on most compact sized bodies are pretty pointless .
As for the camera itself. It looks a good effort. I will agree the price looks heavy but let's wait and see.
Wait, is this true? I heard on one of the YouTube video reviews that the flash ships with the camera, but that doesn't appear to be the case (here in the U.S) when I check what's included with the kit.
deepbluejh wrote:
So what do you think? Good move by Canon or did they miss the mark? Why?
Right on the mark, IMO.
People have been asking for a compact with a large sensor from Canon - and the M delivers just that.
It's also priced and spec'd correctly (pricing is a little on the high side, actually, but nothing out of the ordinary, like the 5DIII ).
It seems to me that some people want an M9 for $500 ... and then would still love to hate it and bitch about it.
).