jctriguy wrote:
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?
The fuji provides images that rival my old 5D. I don't want to compromise image quality for camera size, and the fuji does not disappoint in that respect.
I don't need my equipment to be all from Canon. I pick cameras based on my needs, not on brand. The fuji X100 is a joy to use and produces stunning results from such a compact camera. What more can you want?
chez wrote:
The fuji provides images that rival my old 5D. I don't want to compromise image quality for camera size, and the fuji does not disappoint in that respect.
I don't need my equipment to be all from Canon. I pick cameras based on my needs, not on brand. The fuji X100 is a joy to use and produces stunning results from such a compact camera. What more can you want?
I think the key here is what more could YOU want. If what you use works for you, that's great. I would guess you aren't the 'typical' customer that Canon is looking for. You are happy to use an old school style rangefinder camera with a fixed lens and full manual dials, that costs quite a lot. I don't want that and based on the number of cameras from other companies that are coming out, I would guess most people don't want that either. If I had lots of extra cash it would be neat to have a camera like an M9 or x100, but I certainly wouldn't get one until I had every other piece of camera gear that I needed.
I know a lot of people that are scared by dSLR's but also want better images than a P&S. As has been mentioned a number of times, it makes a great backup body or travel body if you want to bring both a dSLR and compact camera.
I guess my point is that everyone has different wants and needs and proclaiming 'Why would you buy a nice small portable camera and stick this big ugly EF lens on it..' is more showing ignorance of other possible uses in my opinion. I'm not going to buy one of these cameras but I can certainly see how some people would find it to be a very useful camera for a number of different purposes.
jctriguy wrote:
I think the key here is what more could YOU want. If what you use works for you, that's great. I would guess you aren't the 'typical' customer that Canon is looking for. You are happy to use an old school style rangefinder camera with a fixed lens and full manual dials, that costs quite a lot. I don't want that and based on the number of cameras from other companies that are coming out, I would guess most people don't want that either. If I had lots of extra cash it would be neat to have a camera like an M9 or x100, but I certainly wouldn't get one until I had every other piece of camera gear that I needed.
I know a lot of people that are scared by dSLR's but also want better images than a P&S. As has been mentioned a number of times, it makes a great backup body or travel body if you want to bring both a dSLR and compact camera.
I guess my point is that everyone has different wants and needs and proclaiming 'Why would you buy a nice small portable camera and stick this big ugly EF lens on it..' is more showing ignorance of other possible uses in my opinion. I'm not going to buy one of these cameras but I can certainly see how some people would find it to be a very useful camera for a number of different purposes. ...Show more →
No, not really ignorance, but just my opinion...just like you are stating your opinions. My walk around everywhere camera is the X100 and it fits into my jacket without issue. If I take my EF lenses with me, I take my DSLR with me...so I don't need the mirrorless in those situations. Having the ability to use my EF lenses on the mirrorless is much lower on my priority list than having a real viewfinder and having a convenient way of changing focus points, and exposure without having to look away from what I am trying to take a photo of. I just envision it being very awkward to use the LCD to both compose the photos, select the focus points and change aperatures or shutter speeds when your subject is moving. Could be wrong...but it just does not feel like a very responsive camera to me. Again, just my opinion. You are entitled to your own of course.
+ it's an integral part of the Canon system
+ compact
+ simple
+ fits to the imaging experience of modern (smartphone UI used) consumers
+ IQ, shows clearly why a dedicated imaging camera has it's place next to cell phones, iPods, a.o.
+ less vulnerable than a Rebel
+ great little lenses (more to come
+ the M is the beginning of a new system (my prediction: the Rebel market will collapsein the next few years)
+ low production cost, potentially lower future pricing, in the meantime good for Canon's business and market position
- weird positioning at start
- no articulate screen
- slow AF, this might be acceptable at a certain price level especially for those who will have the M next to their D-SLR, but in comparison to the competition this is a unique-non-selling-point . NEX and Oly are faster anyway.
- focus peaking would have been nice for all the alt glass lovers and those who love the photographing experience of manual focus
-no flash indicates how difficult Canon's positioning is. No flash in general is no problem for the enthusiast. But for the P&S entry level photographer this is definitely a unique-non-selling point.
- this camera is not sexy at all. It's not per se ugly to my taste, but it doesn't have the appeal that other products from the competition have. It's boring in comparison to a OM-D or a NEX.
- not really innovative. More the kind of "me too" product. Is it to be expected from a company like Canon? In a way to defend their market one can understand. Otoh the market is moving fast and Canon is rapidly losing their market leadership aura. That is annoying from a company that profiles it's corporate identity as one of the biggest patent owners for imaging technology in the world. It doesn't show in this product.
Once the price drops it's the type of camera that will probably sell well to entry-level photographers bundled as a ready to shoot kit in places like Costco, which is currently carrying the T3i and 60D packages. The T3i package with two lenses is $980, the 60D with one lens $1,300.
At Costco today I watched a couple looking at cameras. The husband was hovering around the 60D, the wife the cute little white Nikon J1. Costco is currently selling a J1 kit with 10-30mm, 30-110mm lenses, 8GB card and case with a $250 mail-in rebate: net cost $650. Any guesses as to what got put into the shopping cart?
For me personally? I own a 20D and upgraded to a 50D which meet my needs. It would be nice to have a body that shoots 1080p video but for the limited number of videos I do the iPad3 with on the fly editing in iMovie has been adequate. So I don't see an EOS-M in my future.
My wife who enjoys taking photos with her Panasonic P&S and iPhone steadfastly refuses to even pick up my cameras — too heavy, too complicated. The smaller size of the EOS-M might appeal to her, but it's still a bit too big to fit into the purse. The only chance for a sale of an EOS-M in this household would be if Canon bundled the camera with a matching Jimmy Choo camera bag / purse.
Ya know it's Canon and it will likely sell because of that. And a few will want to be able to use their EF/S lenses with it, but as with the Sony, give or take a pancake or two, aren't the lenses just going to be the same size?
There's also not much of a system or a roadmap there.
Seems to me that Oly/Panny are just a far better proposition, unless of course you're looking to stick a tiny body on a big heavy peice of glass.
Maybe Canon will be better somewhere down the line, but it doesn't seem especially compelling right now.
Richie S wrote:
Ya know it's Canon and it will likely sell because of that. And a few will want to be able to use their EF/S lenses with it, but as with the Sony, give or take a pancake or two, aren't the lenses just going to be the same size?
No.
Don't know about Sony (who are not known for their lenses).
But the EOS EF-M mount means that there is a much shorter flange to sensor distance than even EF-S, let alone EF. This means that wideangles don't have to be nearly so much retrofocus, which means much smaller lenses there and for any zoom that includes wide angles.
goosemang wrote:
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
Don't hold your breath.
You are not going to get an optical viewfinder in a camera that supports a complete range of 10 mm to 1600 mm (800 x 2) lenses without one of these:
A) Restricting the range of lenses to a small range like 22mm to 55 mm, ala Leica (35mm to 90 mm)
There's just a lot of over-the-top yada, yada, yada, and blah, blah, blah about this camera's perceived shortcomings. Let's all just take a breath and October will be here soon enough. For me, the bottom line will always be image quality and general performance.
peacefrog33756 wrote:
There's just a lot of over-the-top yada, yada, yada, and blah, blah, blah about this camera's perceived shortcomings. Let's all just take a breath and October will be here soon enough. For me, the bottom line will always be image quality and general performance.
+1
Amen
I'm waiting for photos of this camera with 800mm L
eosfun wrote:
- focus peaking would have been nice for all the alt glass lovers and those who love the photographing experience of manual focus
Actually this would be nice on the 5D3! They crippled the usability of video on it terribly by leaving this out.
Now we have to mess (and wait on) ML. For what? Canon marketing are....
As for the M, the lack of built-in flash and the very slow AF are trouble points to say the least, otherwise it sounds good for people who like that sort of thing.
chez wrote:
Why would you even want to mount your EF lenses to this camera? The whole idea of a small mirrorless camera is portability. Add EF lenses and throw your portability out. If I want to use my EF lenses, I'll just grab my 5D2 with them.
Thank you, I was waiting for someone to say that. We both are thinking alike.
garyvot wrote:
This isn't a camera aimed at enthusiasts, which I suspect is the reason for all the hate/whining/bitching/griping.
Canon, like Nikon, is positioning this as a step-up offering for Powershot users wanting better image quality / flexibility but who find DSLRs off-putting. Not as a replacement for DSLRs. This is a perfectly reasonable and legitimate business strategy for Canon and Nikon, the two worldwide leaders in the DSLR market.
Personally, I think focusing on the camera body is irrelevant. The more interesting discussion is probably around the EOS-M system itself. Will it grow someday to include enthusiast and even professional models? Perhaps, if the DSLR business begins shrinking and competition from others heats up.
But we shouldn't expect Canon and Nikon to prematurely hasten the death of the DSLR market. If you want market disruption, you'll have to find it from the niche players like Olympus.
eosfun wrote:
- slow AF, this might be acceptable at a certain price level especially for those who will have the M next to their D-SLR, but in comparison to the competition this is a unique-non-selling-point . NEX and Oly are faster anyway.
This together with its sub-par sensor (next to current Sony CMOS offerings) are MAJOR shortcomings IMO.
eosfun wrote:
- not really innovative. More the kind of "me too" product. Is it to be expected from a company like Canon? In a way to defend their market one can understand. Otoh the market is moving fast and Canon is rapidly losing their market leadership aura. That is annoying from a company that profiles it's corporate identity as one of the biggest patent owners for imaging technology in the world. It doesn't show in this product.
I am just waiting for the competition (in particular Sony and Olympus) to catch up on their lens offerings. In particular, I'm looking for a ~ 200 mm (35 mm equivalent) image-stabilized macro lens. It's time to consider jumping ship. Honestly, I've given up on Canon being innovative.
thw2 wrote:
I am just waiting for the competition (in particular Sony and Olympus) to catch up on their lens offerings. In particular, I'm looking for a ~ 200 mm (35 mm equivalent) image-stabilized macro lens. It's time to consider jumping ship. Honestly, I've given up on Canon being innovative.
Bye-bye!
I hope you jump ship to Olympus which has innovative criminal financing. Maybe you can get on board just in time for them to sink.
. NEX and Oly are faster anyway.
