I'd be willing to give this a shot, but h.265 as the only video codec? really? no thanks right now, too much trouble
I've tried a bunch of trinkets over the years. Best I find is a regular camera backpack, or shoulder bag. If you need access to your camera that fast in order to get the shot, you usually need it in your hand. or at least on a blackrapid strap with all the settings ready to go.I use a wrist strap, or wrap the neckstrap around my wrist. Otherwise the blackrapid strap works well and is almost like having the camera in your hand.Another great way I've found is to hook the backpack sternum strap under the mirror box. The camera then hangs against your chest with the lens pointing down
StevenE: I bought the original EOS-M, with 22mm f/2, the 11-22 mm IS lens, and adapter ONLY because I expected a better camera body to come. Now I'm just very angry at Canon for withholding the EOS-M3 from North America.
Why sell us lenses and then withhold the body.... that's a scam!
I am in Canada. I don't really care how it happened, they are selling the lenses here and withholding the body. You really don't see a problem with that?
Would be interesting if it was bluetooth
Snikt228: Talk about major head in sand? I think most executives would at least say something about the competition and use creative wording but this guy just says basically "Nope"
When you look at mirrorless cameras from your competitors, what scares you the most?Looking at all of the mirrorless cameras out there, there’s nothing that really frightens us.
You must watch the industry very closely - what did you learn from watching sony and Nikon go before you, in terms of offering nigher resolutions?There's nothing in particular that we learned from Nikon or Sony
True .... everyone but Canon knows that Sony owns the mirrorless market, and some are trading in their 5D3's for Sony A7 systems.
I bought the original EOS-M, with 22mm f/2, the 11-22 mm IS lens, and adapter ONLY because I expected a better camera body to come. Now I'm just very angry at Canon for withholding the EOS-M3 from North America.
QuarryCat: it is good for long legs, but as not as good for small faces.no good idea to go as close to a face - you could use your smartphone instead...both are worse for head shots.
it is a perfect lens for the early and the evening hours, for dark scenses - but not for these kind of pictures!
"But I speak about a natural face, a face where eyes, nose, mouth and ears are in a real life proposing - the face you see, when you look with your eyes to somebody!"
This is where you lose it. When you look at someone, how far are you? Are you close and intimate? Are you across the room, across the street? This is the effect of the focal length. The distortion, or lack of, due to "focal length" is actually only the result of focal distance. Surely your understanding of physics informs you of this?
There is no "face naturally as it is", other than your ideal memory from a specific distance, a specific lighting, etc. Your brain and memory only deceives you into thinking there is.
And on another, completely different note: the image is what matters. It's effect, it's impact, it's emotion, it's symbolism, it's beauty.
QuarryCat ... spare me the internet-expert crap.... a good photographer will use the appropriate lens for the effect he/she wants.Only a sanctimonious ass will insist on an 80 - 135 mm for all portraits. You stick to your rules to impress newbies while others, like Lee Jeffries, deservedly win awards.
This is an absurd limitation to adopt for yourself. Lee Jeffries shoots haunting street portraits using exclusively a Canon 24 1.4L on a Canon 5D. http://leejeffries.500px.com/homeless
The best lens is not even mentioned here: 11-22 f/4.5-5.6 IS. The smallest ultra-wide, and it produces decent results and has IS.
But without a good body, it's mostly paper weight. I have been waiting 2 years for a decent APS-C "M" camera, to no avail in Canada. Going to buy into the Sony A7 series now. I bought the original M with the 22mm, the 11-22, and an adapter for my Canon lenses. I have 3 L zooms, the 100 2.8L IS Macro, and several non-L Canon primes, and the foray to Sony for a small mirrorless body might result in abandoning Canon for Full frame altogether for me. I still love my 5D3, but would much prefer to keep things simple.
StevenE: They left out the most important innovation Canon has to offer in DSLRs: Dual Pixel AF. That was the one feature I was hoping would be included, and it's absence is a deal breaker for me. DPAF allows me to leave a camera pointed at a subject unattended for video interviews, and keep the subject always in focus. It is THE market differentiator, and they withheld it!
CNY ... "fairly well" is not good enough for unattended video interviews. However I may buy a couple of 70D for this. It is the only DSLR camera that can reliably stay focused on a face for any length of time.
StevenE: What a con job Canon did on us in North America. Offer nice little lenses, and withhold a decent camera to use them. I bought the lenses ONLY thinking there was a decent camera body coming some day. I'll never trust Canon like that again. Now I'm stuck with one of the worst camera bodies I have ever used if I want to make use of those lenses.Bad Taste In mouth ... must reach for SONY
The frustrating part is that the EF-M 11-22 IS and 22mm f/2 are great little lenses begging for a really good camera body. As far as I know the 11-22 is the smallest ultra-wide available for any system, and it's sharp and has IS to boot! The 22mm f/2 is probably one of the best value lenses out there too.These two lenses alone deserve an all-out top-notch body
They left out the most important innovation Canon has to offer in DSLRs: Dual Pixel AF. That was the one feature I was hoping would be included, and it's absence is a deal breaker for me. DPAF allows me to leave a camera pointed at a subject unattended for video interviews, and keep the subject always in focus. It is THE market differentiator, and they withheld it!
SmoothGlass: This proves Canon is still not entirely serious about mirrorless. No USA launch, high prices, no integrated EVF option (instead get a hack job and hand-me-down EVF designed for an older compact camera), probably still slower-than-a6000 AF, and inability to have both EVF and external flash at the same time.
We were conned into buying the lenses. Now stuck with a piece of UTTER CRAP body to use them
What a con job Canon did on us in North America. Offer nice little lenses, and withhold a decent camera to use them. I bought the lenses ONLY thinking there was a decent camera body coming some day. I'll never trust Canon like that again. Now I'm stuck with one of the worst camera bodies I have ever used if I want to make use of those lenses.Bad Taste In mouth ... must reach for SONY
StevenE: Does it have bad moire and aliasing like the original A7?
Here you go. It takes no time with google to find problems with moire in A7 video. (I dealt with moire in the 5D2, and now no moire at all in 5D3. Not interested in moire problems ever again):
Does it have bad moire and aliasing like the original A7?
I think this kind of thing actually cheapens the brand.
I read this post just to see the funny, and legitimate, comments criticizing this product, and their would-be customers
goodgeorge: So I voluntarily reduce the the contrast by adding color filter.
In the time of computers is almost any filter (besides polarisers, gray and (strong) graduated filters) better added in computer.
And if you shoot JPG - sell your SLR and buy a superzoom.
@Wye ...np ... color shifts can be faked, but nothing is free.@Prof ... if the reflected glare hasn't clipped the highlight, you may be able to enhance the underlying detail, but that's not reproducing the effect of the polarizer, which can eliminate the reflected light such that it never existed (as far as the sensor is concerned). The saturated signal has no detail to recover, and of course even in not fully saturated regions there is no information about polarization. If the sensor was able to detect and quantify polarization, then in theory the signal from reflected light could be separated from the signal of the non-reflected light (since the reflected portions have been polarized by the reflected surface), but you would still need a sensor with huge DR since the reflected light is often just clipped glare.