PhotoKhan: Thanks for the article, Rishi. Superior, as always.
I recently bought a Canon EOS M3. The Canon M line makes sense to me as an additional piece of the EOS system.
As I've pointed out repeatedly in the past, it is not a mirrorless "per se" but rather an additional, fully interchangeable tool for an extremely competent and versatile "photo universe".
However, if this level of seamless integration (...and, possibly, even advantages...) with Canon EF lenses is confirmed by full reviews in the near future, all that will be remaining from that "integrated EOS" approach will be the Speedlite system.
I am seeing myself accepting not being able to benefit from the Speedilite vector, if the a7RII+Metabones proves to be everything it is promising to be.
With this on the table, Canon feeble, half-committed attempts at mirrorless are beginning to look like a embarrassing third-class, previously retired aging magician act in a mass-tourist Cancun hotel vs. David Copperfield at the MGM.
I think that Canon can do it better. But they rely on its marketing and present market position.It seems as they don't see that the transition from mirror to mirrorless is as powerful as the move from analogue to digital.
750d and 760d? Just a marketing idea.750d should have 760d specifications, and 760d should have an EVF.But it's Canon, they only have to wait that others change things.
Yes, an optical viewer is beautiful, if you have a good optical viewer. If you have a bad optical viewer and you haven't microAF adjustment, there's no doubt, go for mirrorless. There's no discusion, here. And all "entry level" DSLR have a bad optical viewer and haven't microAF. So... It's very clear.
Mirrorless have a lot of advantages, beginning with the no need to microAF adjustment. But It will have more and more advantages over mirror cameras. Mirrorless cameras are a no way return. It's like change from analog to digital. Some people shot with analog film, but 99.9% shots in digital.
Canon 760d should be 100d specifications, in a 700d body, with an electronic viewfinder, and with 760d speedier live view autofocus, with 760d price.That is what clients are expecting. No need of 24 MP, but yes need of electronic viewfinder. It's very simple.Mirror is obsolete technology, as it is analog technology. It's ok, but it's only for old fashioned, romantical people. Put this in your mind. The game has changed as it changed with digital.
nicoboston: If you want to have fun with a DSLR and good lenses, and don't want a big camera, get a 100D (SL1). The 100D should be the only "Rebel". The other ones (6 Rebels !!!) are mostly useless. Those who want a simple entry level DSLR will get the 100D, and if they need more "serious" gear they have the XXDs. Currently Canon has 17 EOS DSLRs available and it does not make sense ! In the current context it is totally counterproductive.They should get rid of at least 50% of current DSLR bodies, unless they want to make this wonderful EOS system totally incomprehensible :-(
You're right. 100d it's perhaps "too small", but it's the only current XXX camera that can be named a "rebel". And in a benchmark, it's AF and live-AF is almost as fast as 70d...In fact, I think that Canon marketing department was ill when they released it.
rhurani: we come here to read some insight and we get only insults and blames. get-a-life people
Manufacturers receive from customers the same treatment they give them.
Zigadiboom: The Canon Rebel series is like Jurassic World - a recycling of a 20 year old concept with much less glamour and shine than the original.
Not only Rebel series. 5DS series are almost worse...Canon's current single asset is marketing.
Canon 760d should have EVF, and it must rely on the live view AF. That's a real game charger, as Sony does. But not, you have a mirror camera without microAF adjustment.But hey, the innovation is that 760d have a LCD display!!! As the 350d already had 10 years ago!!!!
MacroBokeh: I rather carry big lenses of A7rII than carrying a DSLR then having to think on calibrating the lenses and body. Mirrorless doesn't need calibration.
And the worst is that Canon and Nikon are selling a lot of DSLR without microAF!!!Mix a 18 MP, 20 MP camera and a f2.8, f1.4 lens, and you have a bomb!!!
toni2: Canon rebel cameras need microAF urgently. Mix 18 MP sensor with F2.8 lens is a nightmare.We're not talking about get a lot of photos per second, we're not talking about to get a sealed body. We're only talking about to get photos in focus.
There are people that have no problems and there are people that have problems. For example, I have front-focus problems with a 17-50 at 17 mm. At 50 mm it is ok.If you don't have focus problems, congrulations. It's the best thing.But if others have focus problems, there must be a solution, it's a reflex camera, it's not a toy. I think that is unacceptable that you can not correct an error in microfocusing.
Canon rebel cameras need microAF urgently. Mix 18 MP sensor with F2.8 lens is a nightmare.We're not talking about get a lot of photos per second, we're not talking about to get a sealed body. We're only talking about to get photos in focus.
toni2: Canon are doing really bad with rebel line (750d, 760d...). It hasn't microAF adjustment. So it is really easy to have bad focused images, and you can't adjust that.And Canon M3 hasn't electronic viewfinder and has a EF-M mount (it isn't EF-S compatible).
Really, I don't understand Canon. Well, I understand Canon marketing people: make waste time and money to it's clients.
It seems that Canon don't want to put microAF in the rebel line. It is software disabled (firmware) because people from Magic Lantern says that it is hardware enabled from 550d...So If Canon don't want to put microAF in the rebel line, the only way would be to put an electronic viewfinder and always use live view AF.
to fatdeemanWell I think that microAF is a "must" feature of any reflex (mirror) camera because it's the only way to ensure a good focus.If Canon or Nikon or others don't want to enable it for any number of lens (market segmentation), at least It must be enabled for a pair of lens.The point that is really clear is that any reflex camera must have microAF, because of the limitations and problems inherent of the focus system. In other words, mirrorless cameras hasn't this problems. So I think that isn't admissible that a mirrorless camera has no focus problems and a reflex camera has it.
I think Canon should arrive a compromise: they know that is not acceptable to sell a reflex without microAF, because it is not sure that it will get in focus photos. Particularly if you mix a high MP camera (18 MP and above) and high brightness lenses (F2.8 and under).So the commitment should be to add a firmware in the rebel line to enable the microAF of the camera with 2 lens (no more). So professional market, that wants more features and have more lenses could continue, and the amateur users who have focus problems could solve it.
To zlatko Yes, it seems that for Canon, you can do a lot of things with a Rebel (DSLR, interchangeable lens) camera, except get in focus photos.Perhaps I'm expecting too much of a DSLR, interchangeable lens, camera. Or are you talking about a compact digital camera?
To fatdeemanI think there are people like zlatko that have no solution.I have been reading the studio test report (read it), and there is a lot of people that think as you or me.Any DSLR nowadays should have microAF adjustment. Current reflex cameras have a lot of MP and any defect is maximized.
to blackcoffee17I write: "So If Canon don't want to put microAF in the rebel line, the only way would be to put an electronic viewfinder and always use live view AF."Your conclusion: "The only way would be to put an electronic viewfinder and always use live view AF".Learn to read.
To zlatkoYou can change the default kit lens on the rebel line, or have a lot of lens. It's possible that some lens doesn't work well.Your solution seems to be: bad luck, look away. Or don't change the lens.
The thing is that any reflex can have focus problem, by design. If a reflex, with mirror, have this problem, and you have the system to correct it, why not to include it? And I said that in rebel line it's only a thing of firmware. And If you don't want to use it, don't use it! A lot of people perhaps don't have an external flash but it's control is included in the firmware. No problem. The problem is in your mind.
HaroldC3: No surprises here. The images generally lack great sharpness and the noise levels are no great improvement (why would they be though?)
Canon sensor technology is almost as it's 5 years old technology, so no really good improvements in noise levels. Sony sensor technology it's a lot better. I'm sorry, but it's a fact.
And with an aps-c sensor, 24 MP is a lot. With dxomarks you can see as any lens on an any aps-c sensor only gives 12 MP aprox. So, any aps-c sensor beyond 16 MP is a really stupid thing. But it sells!!! hehehe
To blackcoffee17There will be always people who do not see a span beyond their noses.MicroAf is only a thing of firmware, and you are suggesting to forget it.Perhaps would be better the surgeries without anesthesia? In fact, why are we using a digital camera when we can use a film camera?
To zlatkoPerhaps people buys a DSLR to get in focus photos? Or it is too much complicated for a DSLR?Oh yes, it is too much complicated for a entry level user. So you only have to say him: I'm sorry, but if you change your kit lens with a better lens, maybe you will get out of focus photos.
Canon are doing really bad with rebel line (750d, 760d...). It hasn't microAF adjustment. So it is really easy to have bad focused images, and you can't adjust that.And Canon M3 hasn't electronic viewfinder and has a EF-M mount (it isn't EF-S compatible).
Ok, CR9 is a bit faster thant CR8 to load an image and in the preview work. But when you click the "open" button to load the image in Photoshop, It is so slow as CR8. I think Adobe people don't use CR in a "normal" workflow...