The M has a serious disadvantage in not having any kind of finder. For handheld shooting it would be important to press the camera to the front head for better stability. It hasnt even a built in flash which could help. I dont really see what they thought when they designed it, it's not really made for the advanced nor is it something for beginners
gdanmitchell wrote:
It is not a "Canon-mount DSLR," which is the subject of this forum. It is also not intended to be a particularly high-end product. There is a sense that Canon introduced the low-end model first, and that more capable and interesting bodies in this series may come later.
For some people the current one is probably a fine option.
Dan
That's the problem...it is not a high end product but it sports a high end price.
jctriguy wrote:
What does 'SLR' stand for? Last I checked it meant that it had a prism and mirror.
Let's give this a rest. There are all sorts of threads that stray much further away than this. In fact, mirrorless might haveba lot in common with single lens reflex cameras...it might be the technology thst put the end to SLR's of today.
GC5 wrote:
Since it requires an adapter for EOS lenses, I see absolutely no reason to move from the NEX system I already had. Canon was late to the party and needed to offer a better product. They didn't. They'll take some market share based on their name alone, but the M doesn't cut it IMO, offering nothing new at a relatively high price point.
+1
The EOS M was purely a defensive move from Canon to stop their existing base moving the other brands mirrorless. Any newcomer would be better served but other brands that offer better prodcuts at lower prices. As a long time EOS user myself with plenty of L glass all I can say is that my Olympus OM-D rocks and the latest M4/3 glass is very good.
The EOS M was purely a defensive move from Canon to stop their existing base moving the other brands mirrorless. Any newcomer would be better served but other brands that offer better prodcuts at lower prices. As a long time EOS user myself with plenty of L glass all I can say is that my Olympus OM-D rocks and the latest M4/3 glass is very good.
There is nothing in the EOS m that interests me.
I think that is the bottom line. What in the EOS-m camera system is better than the OM-D system?
jctriguy wrote:
What does 'SLR' stand for? Last I checked it meant that it had a prism and mirror.
I would agree, it is more like PS with ability to detach lens to me. If we are talking about anything Canon is making lets talk about printers and copy machines as well I don't care about and I don't need this camera.
Breitling65 wrote:
I would agree, it is more like PS with ability to detach lens to me. If we are talking about anything Canon is making lets talk about printers and copy machines as well I don't care about and I don't need this camera.
Is there something about the title of this thread you did not understand? It is clearly about the EOS-M camera. If you don't care about this camera, why did you enter this thread.
Personally, I don't care about the 1D-X...way too expensive for me so I just skip by threads about the 1D-X. It's easy to do...you should try it one time.
Breitling65 wrote:
I would agree, it is more like PS with ability to detach lens to me. If we are talking about anything Canon is making lets talk about printers and copy machines as well I don't care about and I don't need this camera.
Put a 7D sensor in a copy machine and give it the ability to AF with EF lenses and sure, it belongs here.
EOS-M camera is Canon-mount camera as much as is any old Canon FD. It does have mount and it is a camera made by Canon.
And why there isnt much buzz, well considering it can compete probably only with K-01 and Q, no wonder.. It doesnt mean it cant be used, its just far less then expected. Especially when you can imagine what it could be..
chez wrote:
Is there something about the title of this thread you did not understand? It is clearly about the EOS-M camera. If you don't care about this camera, why did you enter this thread.
Personally, I don't care about the 1D-X...way too expensive for me so I just skip by threads about the 1D-X. It's easy to do...you should try it one time.
I could say same about name of the forum to you back, you would like to read about copy machines or ps cameras why are you are here?
corndog wrote:
Put a 7D sensor in a copy machine and give it the ability to AF with EF lenses and sure, it belongs here.
it is ps with lens detachment abilities and larger sensor. lens is questionable, iq is exactly same as ps, af is dead slow, no viewfinder, so? this is why no interest ...
If you can't infer that the similarity is with the sensor area and generation of the underlying CMOS process then it is hopeless to discuss with you. Your point about IQ of the EOS-M being the same as a Point and Shoot implies that the IQ of the 7D (with essentially similar sensor) is equivalent to a PS
Breitling65 wrote:
I could say same about name of the forum to you back, you would like to read about copy machines or ps cameras why are you are here?
Ummm...maybe because they are not cameras. The EOS-M is a Canon camera that can mount EF and EFS lens. The only difference is it has no mirror. Wake up...that is the future.
John Shultz wrote:
If you can't infer that the similarity is with the sensor area and generation of the underlying CMOS process then it is hopeless to discuss with you. Your point about IQ of the EOS-M being the same as a Point and Shoot implies that the IQ of the 7D (with essentially similar sensor) is equivalent to a PS
Logic much?
There is always someone protecting something most people don't care about, not new here. following your logic if they will stick FF sensor from 1DX into this body it would be 1DX?
I don't care about and I don't need this camera.
It doesnt mean it cant be used, its just far less then expected. Especially when you can imagine what it could be..