I haven't had time to read through anything more than the basic specifications yet, but as a system it looks promising. For now I'm glad that I bought a cheap early model Olympus micro 4/3 rather than the OM-D. I wouldn't want to spend the extra on this particular Canon, but if they move forward fairly quickly, I may go back to Canon for mirrorless instead of investing more in Olympus.
Canon have certainly made a better start than Nikon.
The G1x has more appeal to me. The EVIL cameras mostly have lenses that are too big to fit in my jersey pocket while cycling, so they don't carry much easier than a DSLR from my perspective. The G1x on the other hand, has an APS-C sensor, but a compact and retractable lens. It's just more than I want to spend right now. Maybe I'll get a used one in a couple of years. I did pick up a Powershot S90 for $150 the other day to replace my lost G11.
I see a lot of potential, and I'm very glad to see Canon entering the mirrorless marketplace. I think the APS-C sensor is key. This really ups the ante for performance. There is simply no way that cameras with sensors less than 1/4 the area will compete in IQ. Couple that with some fast glass (the f/2 max aperture on the 22mm lens is, I think something we'll see more of) and you've got one lean, mean low light machine.
One great benefit of mirrorless is that the lens mount can be brought much closer to the sensor plane; WA lens design is greatly eased.
Some of the design choices Canon made will need to be tested in the marketplace, so time will tell. As posted previously, as a *system* I think it is an exciting development.
I agree it's good to have a new player in that market but this specific setup seems blah blah same to me. Unlike EFs maybe they will actually make smaller lenses this time because they have to compete. I think there are far better options in this market then the new Canon however.
The G1x has more appeal to me. The EVIL cameras mostly have lenses that are too big to fit in my jersey pocket while cycling, so they don't carry much easier than a DSLR from my perspective. The G1x on the other hand, has an APS-C sensor, but a compact and retractable lens. It's just more than I want to spend right now. Maybe I'll get a used one in a couple of years. I did pick up a Powershot S90 for $150 the other day to replace my lost G11.
Oh, killer deal on the S90... You gonna try to knock me off the top of the hill? ;)
Oh, killer deal on the S90... You gonna try to knock me off the top of the hill? ;)
Yup. And it was as new as it could be. Box opened and almost no pics taken. Also had the Franec grip on it, which is a $30 item and a big plus for taking pics while riding. Well worth the 30 mile drive.
I think there are far better options in this market then the new Canon however.
Horses for courses, methinks. Canon is not intending this to compete with small-sensor mirrorless designs. It's intended to bring SLR performance to a small form factor. Time will tell if the marketing decisions re: features included and those left out will bear fruit for them. I don't at all think that this will be their only entry into the mirrorless marketplace.
The decision to go with the APS-C sensor in interesting, for sure. It will be better for high ISO than m4/3 although the gap is closing.
Like with the Sony NEX system, designing small lenses will be difficult with the larger sensor. So, if compactness is a factor, m4/3 will still have the advantage.
The other issue will be will Canon make or allow others to make adapters for other systems' lenses.
I think the Canon entry is much much stronger than the Nikon mirror-less offering.
The other issue will be will Canon make or allow others to make adapters for other systems' lenses.
That's an interesting question... given their track record with EF mount, I'd say almost definitely "no." Will folks like Tamron & Sigma do so anyway? I'd say there's a pretty good chance, if it looks like the new system will be successful.
While I see that there is an adapter to mount EF lenses, it seems that this is a mechanical adapter only to provide the correct lens-to-sensor spacing. That's too bad, since a "wide converter" adapter could in theory turn any f/2.8 EF lens into an f/2 lens for the EOS-M system.
I think the Canon entry is much much stranger than the Nikon mirror-less offering.
I still haven't looked at the full preview of the EOS M, but I will try to do so tonight. But I'm curious to know in what way you think it's stranger than the Nikon.
I think the Canon entry is much much stranger than the Nikon mirror-less offering.
I still haven't looked at the full preview of the EOS M, but I will try to do so tonight. But I'm curious to know in what way you think it's stranger than the Nikon.
I think the Canon entry is much much stranger than the Nikon mirror-less offering.
I still haven't looked at the full preview of the EOS M, but I will try to do so tonight. But I'm curious to know in what way you think it's stranger than the Nikon.
The other issue will be will Canon make or allow others to make adapters for other systems' lenses.
That's an interesting question... given their track record with EF mount, I'd say almost definitely "no." Will folks like Tamron & Sigma do so anyway? I'd say there's a pretty good chance, if it looks like the new system will be successful.
While I see that there is an adapter to mount EF lenses, it seems that this is a mechanical adapter only to provide the correct lens-to-sensor spacing. That's too bad, since a "wide converter" adapter could in theory turn any f/2.8 EF lens into an f/2 lens for the EOS-M system.
Also part of the charm of the m4/3 is to be able to use older manual lenses. I am looking for a Nikon 105mm 2.5 (my favorite lens of all time) to go with my Oly gear.
Some also tout the older Leica Summicrons as great lenses for the m4/3. There's also a lot of talk in the forums about the "best 50mm 1.4" to use as a portrait lens on m4/3 cameras.
The other issue will be will Canon make or allow others to make adapters for other systems' lenses.
That's an interesting question... given their track record with EF mount, I'd say almost definitely "no." Will folks like Tamron & Sigma do so anyway? I'd say there's a pretty good chance, if it looks like the new system will be successful.
While I see that there is an adapter to mount EF lenses, it seems that this is a mechanical adapter only to provide the correct lens-to-sensor spacing. That's too bad, since a "wide converter" adapter could in theory turn any f/2.8 EF lens into an f/2 lens for the EOS-M system.
Also part of the charm of the m4/3 is to be able to use older manual lenses. I am looking for a Nikon 105mm 2.5 (my favorite lens of all time) to go with my Oly gear.
Some also tout the older Leica Summicrons as great lenses for the m4/3. There's also a lot of talk in the forums about the "best 50mm 1.4" to use as a portrait lens on m4/3 cameras.
There will certainly be no shortage of ways to adapt old MF lenses to the EOS-M. Heck, Canon EOS is already the most flexible 35mm system out there for using old manual glass, due to the relatively short register distance, and the relatively large flange diameter.
Yes, the absence of a viewfinder coupled with the lack of an articulating LCD is problematic. In particular, I'd have a crappy time shooting with it since I'd almost surely need reading glasses to critically judge focus on the LCD.
This is just what I have been waiting for. I am not really a Canon fanboy. I really wanted to go Nikon for my DLSR but at the time Canon made more sense for what I was looking for (particularly the cheap 50mm f1.8).
I would expect this new camera to smoke the Nikon 1 series (the Popphoto review was fairly negative). The STM lenses should bring close to DSLR focus performance. No flash is disappointing but I already have a 270EX.
