When we met with Canon, reps were careful to note what the EOS M is, and what it isn't. In the US, the company is positioning the EOS M as a video-first camera, designed to be something of a companion tool for videographers and cinematographers much the same way the G1 X is designed for pro shooters who want something smaller than their DSLR. Since it lacks a viewfinder, reps said, it doesn't provide the same still photography experience as a camera like the T4i. Without the controls and ergonomics of a DSLR, it's also not as fast to operate. Canon's not even calling the EOS M a "mirrorless camera," lest buyers be confused into thinking it's a NEX or Micro Four Thirds competitor. Though the camera's clearly capable of the same functionality as a NEX-F3 or an Olympus OM-D E-M5, Canon imagines a different user, one much more focused on video. If you want to step up from a point-and-shoot, reps said, buy a T4i. (http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/23/3176697/canons-eos-m-arrives-a-799-99-aps-c-mirrorless-camera-competitor)
Yes, I picked up on this distinction reading Canon's M press release but not as blatantly as stated here. The G1X press release was much more pro-sumer oriented. DPR's preview stated that the G1X was more for photographers. Given that the G1X was either ignored or trivially dismissed on this forum, I'm curious about Canon's criteria here. The G1X only has one feature, great IQ for its size, but that's clearly not what people want. It will be interesting to see how the G1X lens compares optically to the M kit lens.
retrofocus wrote:
A full frame mirrorless Canon with the properties shown would sell for $3000. It would sell likely better than the 5D III......
there will not be a FF M
Going by the blurb i read on DPR it looks (images suggest it as well) that the body and M mount is designed totally to the 1.6 sensor. you just will not get a FF sensor in there.
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
Going by the blurb i read on DPR it looks (images suggest it as well) that the body and M mount is designed totally to the 1.6 sensor. you just will not get a FF sensor in there.
"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949
"But what ... is it good for?"
Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.
jeremy_clay wrote:
"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949
"But what ... is it good for?"
Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.
"But the home pc will never sell, let's stick our worst design team in the basement corner and let them work on our home pc."
Sadly.... that was the PC that took over the world. The most feeble of all the designs.... and sadly it also led to MS the most feeble OS taking over. Just shows that luck/marketing/press manipulation rule over tech.
When we met with Canon, reps were careful to note what the EOS M is, and what it isn't. In the US, the company is positioning the EOS M as a video-first camera, designed to be something of a companion tool for videographers and cinematographers much the same way the G1 X is designed for pro shooters who want something smaller than their DSLR. Since it lacks a viewfinder, reps said, it doesn't provide the same still photography experience as a camera like the T4i. Without the controls and ergonomics of a DSLR, it's also not as fast to operate. Canon's not even calling the EOS M a "mirrorless camera," lest buyers be confused into thinking it's a NEX or Micro Four Thirds competitor. Though the camera's clearly capable of the same functionality as a NEX-F3 or an Olympus OM-D E-M5, Canon imagines a different user, one much more focused on video. If you want to step up from a point-and-shoot, reps said, buy a T4i. (http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/23/3176697/canons-eos-m-arrives-a-799-99-aps-c-mirrorless-camera-competitor)
I think they have a pretty solid setup. I only wish they had a side swiveling screen like the G12. Though it would have made the camera a bit larger, I think it would make the camera even more useful for video --- something I do a lot.
I just bought the sony nex 5n, and canon releases this. I have a ton of canon lenses.
well the obvious problem with large sensor mirorless cameras are bulky zoom lenses. panasonic has done well with their 14-42 collapsible (expensive) lens. these cameras make sense with pancake primes, such as the 22 f2, an may be a 30-35 1.8-2, and the kit lens.
Lack of a view finder is a negative. I could care less about the on board flash.
Accepting ef lenses with autofocus is nice as a concept. its just after you add the adapter, the whole thing becomes ridiculously large (maybe with exception of 50 1.8, 35 f2, 40 2.8). and if you are going to use your existing lenses. you will probably use the existing body you have with any larger lenses.
Going by the blurb i read on DPR it looks (images suggest it as well) that the body and M mount is designed totally to the 1.6 sensor. you just will not get a FF sensor in there.
Surely not in this M model, yes! But it is only a matter of time and we will see a full frame M camera. Maybe sooner than we would guess!
chez wrote:
If I want to stick an EF prime onto a camera, I'll use a DSLR. The rebels are perfect for this. My view of a mirrorless camera is one that I can put into a jacket pocket and have it with me all the time. The exludes any of the primes you mentioned above.
So you prefer the single use one trick pony of the x100 to carry with you (for $400 more). Sounds reasonable but it means you aren't the person they are looking at selling an INTERCHANGEABLE LENS mirrorless camera to. Why don't you take something like the G1x, it has a very good sensor, zoom lens, manual dials and controls, fits in your pocket and costs less than the fuji?
goosemang wrote:
i think it really does make sense, despite the things i wish it had. it probably appeals to a range of folks:
your average mom and pop can now take photographs/video with APS-C image quality in what is essentially a no brain point & shoot package. these are the folks who wouldn't carry a rebel, and even if they did they wouldn't want to learn how to use it.
also, green box-ers will be interested. i was at a wedding on saturday and there had to be a dozen people using entry level DSLR's. every one of them had it set to the green box with the "poppy-uppy" flash blazing away. i bet you $50 if you told them they could have the same image quality in something half the size they would buy that instead. they folks don't buy tons of lenses - and when they do they get the 55-250 and call it a day. they don't need a huge selection of L glass. i bet canon rolls out a 55-250 in short order.
then you have the cranky bastards like us who will eventually give this a whirl when they roll out mkii with the viewfinder and a couple more primes...Show more →
I think you've hit the mark on this one. Good assessment in my mind.
deepbluejh wrote:
I think you've got it backward. I see this more for pros who already have existing EF lenses and want something tiny (for whatever reason) they can just toss in the bag for when they don't want to use their DSLRs.
Have you stopped to consider that the market for "pros who already have existing EF lenses and want something tiny (for whatever reason)" is easily several orders of magnitude smaller than the P&S replacement market? It seems likely that Canon would go after the later first.
EDIT: I think I tripped up on your choice of the word "pros", but if you were to say enthusiasts then I think we are much closer in agreement. Still don't think Canon will rush to kill off their entry level DSLR market right away, but it would not be out of the realm of possibility that most DSLRs will be full frame in a few years.
Chumma wrote:
The P&S market is shrinking, and that is being replaced by mirrorless cameras. The market for mirrorless cameras is projected to grow 60% this year.
P&S is not being replaced by "mirrorless" cameras. Setting aside the fact that they are already mirrorless, they are being replaced by cell phones and tablets.
As a percentage, the MIL cameras (mirrorless interchangeable lens) are a small part of the market.
Hmmm... Not sure about this one. I bought the Oly EP-3 to get an ultra-portable kit, and I can carry everything from 12 to 300 mm complete with macro lens in a bag that's smaller than my kindergarten lunch bag when I was five. With the EOS-M, I'd probably just carry my regular Canon kit, 17-40, 100-400, 100 macro, and would only be saving bulk and weight on the body. Not really an incentive to buy.
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 agree with you.
I see this as a response to what Canon sees as a credible threat in the Sony Nex series bodies. I also see this as the bottom of the range where Canon can feel their way without too much embarrassment had they intro'ed a top range camera.
I see these mirror less cameras as digital backs for my tripod mounted architectural photography. Of course I want FF for that but I like the large screen and the touch controls.
As a Nex-C3 competitor they did rather well IMO. The small 22mm pancake directly responds to whining from the internet boards about the size of lenses on offer from Sony. Further, if the 22mm lens is cut from the same cloth as the 40 shorty their will be joy in the Canon camps.
kevindar wrote:
Accepting ef lenses with autofocus is nice as a concept. its just after you add the adapter, the whole thing becomes ridiculously large (maybe with exception of 50 1.8, 35 f2, 40 2.8). and if you are going to use your existing lenses. you will probably use the existing body you have with any larger lenses.
Depending on who is shooting what. I have wildlife subjects that flee at the sound of a DSLR, even when shooting with a 400mm lens.
The G1X is now a third cheaper in the UK than its release price.....no doubt this offering will go the same way.
Personally.....I can't see it being a second camera for lots of Canon enthusiasts who want to spend a lot of money on a small body so they can use their standard lenses. Most enthusiasts have kit lenses and only want one body...if they have a second....it will be a point and shoot of some description.
I have been toying with the idea of getting a G1X to compliment my G10 but thought I would wait to see what this looked like. I still favour the G1X......not as portable as the G10.....but more so than this body and EF lenses.
Anyway...good luck to it. If it knocks G1X sales that will further depress the prices...
