Imagemaster wrote:
carstenw wrote:
So far, it is just one mildly uninteresting camera with one mildly uninteresting zoom and a prime with potential.


And the choice of using all these lenses, some of which people already own and are using with the EOS-M:


except that all those lenses will all pretty much work better on the NEX since it has a tilt lcd and evf both of which help a great deal in handling large lenses.

Imagemaster wrote:
carstenw wrote:
So far, it is just one mildly uninteresting camera with one mildly uninteresting zoom and a prime with potential.

And the choice of using all these lenses, some of which people already own and are using with the EOS-M:


That isn't specific to this camera, just to the adapter and the system.

I guess it raises an interesting question though. I doubt that the system will go anywhere on its own as it stands (which can change, of course, if Canon releases a more interesting body and more interesting lenses), but can it survive simply by providing a crop body alternative way of using EF/EF-S lenses? In other words, will it become the second (or third...) camera for EF/EF-S lens owners often enough to be a success on those terms?

My feeling is no, a system needs first to stand on its own, but maybe I am wrong.

Depends on how fast those PDAF lens focus on the EF-M, right?

sebboh wrote:
Imagemaster wrote:
carstenw wrote:
So far, it is just one mildly uninteresting camera with one mildly uninteresting zoom and a prime with potential.


And the choice of using all these lenses, some of which people already own and are using with the EOS-M:


except that all those lenses will all pretty much work better on the NEX since it has a tilt lcd and evf both of which help a great deal in handling large lenses.

Not a big fan of the (first) EOS-M, but isnt the idea that you get both AF and IS (when present)? If so I'd say it dwarfs the NEX benefits. Even the sensor which is kind of what I dislike most with Canon at the moment (comparing to best in class, ie Sony)

wfrank wrote:
Not a big fan of the (first) EOS-M, but isnt the idea that you get both AF and IS (when present)? If so I'd say it dwarfs the NEX benefits. Even the sensor which is kind of what I dislike most with Canon at the moment (comparing to best in class, ie Sony)

the NEX - eos adapter gives you IS and auto aperture control, and it seems like AF focus on the eos-m with those lenses is going suck as much as it does for 4/3 lenses on µ43/ and alpha lenses on NEX with the mirrorless adapter. if canon can make autofocus with those lenses useful then it'll mean something, but so far it doesn't seem like they even got AF on their eos-m lens to be fast...

sebboh wrote:
the NEX - eos adapter gives you IS and auto aperture control, and it seems like AF focus on the eos-m with those lenses is going suck as much as it does for 4/3 lenses on µ43/ and alpha lenses on NEX with the mirrorless adapter. if canon can make autofocus with those lenses useful then it'll mean something, but so far it doesn't seem like they even got AF on their eos-m lens to be fast...

Maybe youre right I dont know. It's a bit premature but I would expect native as opposed to reverse engineered AF to work better (as with IS for that matter). But who knows, maybe the Canon EOS-M engineers are isolated from the rest of the company, could be, why not. They designed a soap, maybe a good looking one, but with so many faults.

Here's the preacher Pelle in the band Hives at Jools Holland with the song "Hate to say I told you so"
http://youtu.be/Ux0Ay9eNILQ?hd=1 (fullscreen and a lot of noise please)

carstenw wrote:
Imagemaster wrote:
carstenw wrote:
So far, it is just one mildly uninteresting camera with one mildly uninteresting zoom and a prime with potential.

And the choice of using all these lenses, some of which people already own and are using with the EOS-M:


That isn't specific to this camera, just to the adapter and the system.

I guess it raises an interesting question though. I doubt that the system will go anywhere on its own as it stands (which can change, of course, if Canon releases a more interesting body and more interesting lenses), but can it survive simply by providing a crop body alternative way of using EF/EF-S lenses? In other words, will it become the second (or third...) camera for EF/EF-S lens owners often enough to be a success on those terms?

My feeling is no, a system needs first to stand on its own, but maybe I am wrong.

I'm sure they will release some more lenses and bodies to add to the system. They obviously wouldn't work on a new mount if they were going to stop at 2 lenses and one body.

jctriguy wrote:
carstenw wrote:
Imagemaster wrote:
carstenw wrote:
So far, it is just one mildly uninteresting camera with one mildly uninteresting zoom and a prime with potential.

And the choice of using all these lenses, some of which people already own and are using with the EOS-M:


That isn't specific to this camera, just to the adapter and the system.

I guess it raises an interesting question though. I doubt that the system will go anywhere on its own as it stands (which can change, of course, if Canon releases a more interesting body and more interesting lenses), but can it survive simply by providing a crop body alternative way of using EF/EF-S lenses? In other words, will it become the second (or third...) camera for EF/EF-S lens owners often enough to be a success on those terms?

My feeling is no, a system needs first to stand on its own, but maybe I am wrong.

I'm sure they will release some more lenses and bodies to add to the system. They obviously wouldn't work on a new mount if they were going to stop at 2 lenses and one body.


Of course they will, but in the meantime, we get all these whiners complaining that they did not bring everything onto the market at the start.

wfrank wrote:

Maybe youre right I dont know. It's a bit premature but I would expect native as opposed to reverse engineered AF to work better (as with IS for that matter). But who knows, maybe the Canon EOS-M engineers are isolated from the rest of the company, could be, why not. They designed a soap, maybe a good looking one, but with so many faults.

Here's the preacher Pelle in the band Hives at Jools Holland with the song "Hate to say I told you so"
http://youtu.be/Ux0Ay9eNILQ?hd=1 (fullscreen and a lot of noise please)

The EOS-NEX adapters don't offer AF, only IS and Aperture control (and IS effectiveness depends on the lens, not the body) but remember that the EOS-M has Hybrid-AF, which only works well with STM lenses (all 4 of them, 1 EF, 1 EF-S and 2 EF-M lenses) on both the EOS-M and the Rebel T4i (which shares the EOS-M's AF system for LV and Video modes). Don't expect good AF performance from the non-STM lenses, it'll probably be as slow as non-Imager AF 4/3rds lenses are on the Oly m43 bodies (and remember, Olympus has been working on this a LOT longer than Canon and still hasn't found a solution to getting fast AF with a CDAF system, which is fundamentally what the EOS-M has, the on-chip PDAF Canon went with is an assist, not a primary focusing system like Nikon's 1 series)

<beep>

Kinko begins to ship MILC lenses to Canon

"Kinko Optical, a Taiwan-based maker of optical lens pieces, began shipments of glass lenses for use in MILCs (mirrorless interchangeable-lens cameras) to Canon in July, according to industry sources in Taiwan."

see: http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20120731PD201.html?mod=2

carstenw wrote:
<beep>


<beep<beep>

I guess it all depends on how strong and reliable you believe that implied promise to be.

Yeah, in hindsight I was too harsh there. Ah well.