In what way did Nikon remove themselves? :-)
It reached #1 selling spot in 13 of the most important camera buying countries, including GB, China and USA. It is however looking at a different point in the market, the slot that will in a year or two be the "noticeable step" up from smartphones, now that many smartphones are jsut as good as the cheaper compacts. It isn't catering to the enthusiast market. It is eating away at a shrinking compact camera market, just as NEX, µFT and now the EOS-M system will (and already have) taken a large share of the "sensors larger than 1 inch" market.
Smartphones are now where compacts were only five years ago. APS-crop cameras are now in all and every way better than the first generation of FF cameras. The new market slots are still fluctuating, and it remains to be seen what the segments will be like in just a few years ahead.
One should also remember that this is the first camera in a new segment for Canon, they will undoubtedly grow into their new shoes with supplementing models soon. Some may be even more simple, some may develop some more "enthusiast" market level of physical controls.
Nikon removed themselves from direct competition with a 2.7x crop factor. They chose to create a new segment instead, in between compacts and MFT, with an emphasis on performance and Nikkor AF compatibility. I didn't mean that they removed themselves from the market, but that they removed themselves from competing with other mirrorless cameras. Smart move, and it leaves us alt users none the worse.
For me, ultimately, the Canon M body (and to a lesser extent, M-lenses) will prove its value based on its IQ. I'm happy with my G10 images for what it does, and I'm very happy with my 5D2. If the M body produces images that equal or exceed my 60D (quite likely with the Digic 5 processor), I would be very happy indeed! That sort of quality from such a tiny package, and the use of my existing Canon and Canon-adapted Alt lenses -- hard not to like that!
Everything else is small potatoes -- EVF, fast AF, larger grip, etc. Plenty of room for a second edition.
#1 -- The body needs to focus accurately, even if that takes as long as a G10, and #2 -- it needs to put out high quality images. I've almost jumped for the G1X, and the M seems destined to produce even higher grade images.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I have to say that this camera looks like it was designed by a committee that, after compromising on any unique or daring aspects, ended up with a bar of soap.
Coming from a 5D + L stuff, I downgraded to a 550D + 15-85 because I only use my camera for travel and trips. It's not fun when your basic carrying kit is 2kg. I miss my 5D with those magnificent primes, but I can live with the pictures of my 550D. That's why, if I can downgrade some more, without loosing the image quality I will be a happy man. BUT, there are some doubts:
VF: It's very handy and I don't know if I can live without this (I never use liveview)
Battery Life: The preproduction model can only take 260pictures. That's low
Focus speed: the focus speed of the pre prod cameras is really poor, this needs to be better
Touchscreen: I'm not a big fan of touch screen. But if I can set my most used settings (AV, center AF point, focus and recompose) and then use the dial to change aperture it will be ok.
Quality of the new lenses: I won't be placing big DSLR lenses on this small compact.
Dawud wrote:
I'm maybe the only one who is interested in this?
No, you are not alone. I am interested too, both as an upgrade for G12 and emergency back-up (due to the adapter)
Dawud wrote:
VF: It's very handy and I don't know if I can live without this (I never use liveview)
We can hope to see it available either as an add-on or on a later model
Dawud wrote:
Battery Life: The preproduction model can only take 260pictures. That's low
Common problem for every mirrorless... It's the nature of the beast. Try to only use your DSLR in liveview and you will see the battery running out much faster too :-(
Dawud wrote:
Focus speed: the focus speed of the pre prod cameras is really poor, this needs to be better
Don't you feel it's a bit too early to comment on this? We haven't seen any real review yet. Only some sparse comments.
Even if many of us here are underwhelmed by this first offering by Canon, into the mirrorless world, at least they have now made a start.
Like others I want more external dials and an articulated screen, both of which may appear with another model.
Like Gunzorro, I too have hovered over getting the G1X as a second camera to my 5DII, now I'll wait a while longer to see what follows this.
Minus the peaking, minus the articulated screen, minus the EVF compatibility, minus the popup flash, minus the grip... wait how did they copy it? Oh right they made a small camera with an APS-C sensor.
If anything it's much more like the C3 than the F3.
thrice wrote:
Minus the peaking, minus the articulated screen, minus the EVF compatibility, minus the popup flash, minus the grip... wait how did they copy it? Oh right they made a small camera with an APS-C sensor.
If anything it's much more like the C3 than the F3.
More the original 3, if the IQ on the EOS-M is anything like the Rebel T4i it shares its sensor and processing with, the C3 and all later NEX models beat it handily in IQ as well. Canon really needs to replace their 18MP APS-C sensor with something that's competitive with the current Sony sensors.
After reading more and more on the EOS-M, the camera does grow on you. I do wish the camera had more physical controls and an articulating screen though.
And while having the ability to use Canon's EF and EF-S line up with the adapter, doesn't that defeat the purpose of making a compact camera? I still would have rather seen Canon come out with a micro four thirds to tap into the more compact lenses or expand the EOS-M lens line-up to give users a wider range of compact lenses.
Granted the latter may eventually happen but I just don't see the advantage of shooting with the EOS-M and say... my 70-200mm f2.8L than using the lens with my Canon DSLR. And for $799, I can buy a Rebel body cheaper that is just as capable if I need an emergency backup.
It's a nice first step and hopefully Canon will listen to feedback and continue to develop this new system.
Can anyone explain (simply) the difference in performance between the 18MP Canon Sensor and the 16MP Sony one.
I came across this statement in a dp blog (where I'm not a member)and would like some user friendly expansion on it, ie. in what way "significantly better" in real world use?:
"Canon still have not found a replacement to its semi-old 18mp aps-c sensor. Sony's 16mp and 24mp are performing significantly better. Even Samsung's 20mp aps-c is better than Canon's 18mp."
timballic wrote:
Can anyone explain (simply) the difference in performance between the 18MP Canon Sensor and the 16MP Sony one.
I came across this statement in a dp blog (where I'm not a member)and would like some user friendly expansion on it, ie. in what way "significantly better"?:
"Canon still have not found a replacement to its semi-old 18mp aps-c sensor. Sony's 16mp and 24mp are performing significantly better. Even Samsung's 20mp aps-c is better than Canon's 18mp."
Canon has been using older CMOS technology. Sony's EXMOR CMOS tech, which has column-parallel A/D conversion, has very low read noise and high dynamic range at base ISO. theSuede could certainly get more technical about it than I can.
yeah, Canon has been milking this 18mp APS-C sensor for many generations now, going back to the T2i I believe. hopefully some new sensor technology will be in the works for the next generation of cameras.
timballic wrote:
So basically, significantly lower shadow (?) noise and greater DR? (I don't want more technical, please, I really don't!)
What will this mean in the end product? Or is it hair splitting, ie. the Sony just a little notch ahead, soon to be overtaken by the next little step?
It's both hair splitting and a real advantage/disadvantage. For the vast majority of buyers of the NEX or the EOS-M there will be zero noticeable difference. However, now we're at the alt forum where the vast majority usually do some - to a lot - of postprocessing. In most cases post processing wont make a difference. But specifically, if you were to lift shadows (significantly) in an image, the noise will be far more visible in the Canon sensor than the Sony.
The same can be shown (because it does not show itself) if you compare the 5D3 with the D800 (Sony sensor). It is, BTW, part of Fred Mirandas comparison a while ago, and a well known "phenomenon". This does not make the 5D3 nor the EOS-M a bad camera. But it can be, in some circumstances, a real disadvantage for the Canons. Or perhaps better put, an advantage for the Sony sensors.
