bongsogo: at least they were able to put wifi with nfc in a mag alloy body which canon did not on the 7d mark 2 bec their reason was the mag alloy body
you sure about that? the D7100 body had a lot of plastic in it.
Lin Evans: They probably couldn't catch Sony or even Nikon (with the 1 series) if they really tried. This camera is overpriced, has mediocre autofocus and too many competitors with substantial headstarts. If Canon wants to seriously play in this market they need to go back to their CAD systems and redesign something truly innovative and competitive IMHO..
actually canon is outselling Nikon quite significantly in Japan.
Well considering that IP&S had professional video, one would assume that this new sub would continue to have it, so profits are propped up and supported by Sony's burgeoning professional video segment.
does make you wonder why they'd spin it off if it was long term considered profitable though.
Markintosh: The author probably never had and used EOS-M:) This is the main mistake to look on this small camera as on closed-circle eco-system. This is not Oly, Panasonic, Sony or Fuji — companies who dedicate their entire production to mirrorless cameras and lenses. Stop looking on four native M lenses — with adapter you have access to a tons of fantastic Canon glass and third party lenses. If you need small speedy camera — you have SL1 with real viewfinder and all advantages of DSLR in very compact package. EOS-M is great little camera with amazing IQ and ability ti use same lenses as my 5D. M3 is fantastic improvement of original M, and it's a shame it will not be available in retailers in NA. But there is always online shopping:)))
Also, very nice to see so many comments on such a "bad" product, and so much attention from other brands advocates.
yes it does.. the Hybrid part means both CDAF and PDAF off the sensor.
there's a few pages in the M forum discussing the various difference between Hybrid CMOS AF I through III (III being the latest and in the M3 and also the new Rebels)
@HowaboutRAW - mmm no.
all the M sensors had sensor phase detect.
Battersea: Leaving a viewfinder off shows Canon is not serious. A point and shoot without viewfinder is fine, to save cost and size. No ILC will ever be truly small especially when carrying an alternate lens or external flash. Why not make it a tiny bit larger and include an EVF?
@Jerry-astro - sorry, no bubble here. Just stating facts. and PS.. 3 out of my 5 cameras are MILC's. go figure.
@Turlututu - it seems to be more "size and price" wins in Japan right now, even though for some reason OM E10's are boosting up in sales for no apparent reason over the past week.
yes canon should have a choice - failing a choice though IMO there's nothing in the market stating that for a domestically centered camera, that no evf is a bad thing.
the way MILC"s get cut in price these days, making a big expensive model as your sole model is pretty foolhardy.
Eugeniu Sofroni: I believe the author of the article never used a EOS M
By completely omitting to mention the greatest lens for the EOS M system ( the 11-22mm IS STM ) puts doubt in his "opinion" about the M.
The EOS M is a very capable little system that also has a custom firmware that ads tons of features that are not included in the official firmware. The prices an the performance if the lenses ( 22mm = 120$, 11-22mm = 399$, 55-200$ = 399$ ) ... the other mirrorless systems have bodies and lenses that are about double the price and not double the optical performance. Yeah the Panasonic is fast but it is 3x the cost and the lenses are 2x the cost.
For my needs the M beats the rest hands down.
it does for certain. however there certainly is nothing to be ashamed of the optics they have created and sold. do they need to go the Fuji route? no not really. do they need to the salient primes (50mm, 35, 85 and a macro) - most certainly.
sderdiarian: Statements like "nasty small cameras", "acidic mirrorless camera" and "multiply their wares like bacteria in a dirty petri dish" as compared to bow and scrape language like "these two giants" set my teeth on edge from the get-go.
But they were nothing next to the author's apparent ignorance of CIPA data for 2014 showing 18% growth of mirrorless shipments in the North American market and 8% in Europe as compared to 25% and 37% declines in DSLR sales in these two critical markets respectively.
These "two giants" short sightedly elected to protect sales/reap profits from old technology; let them reap what they've sown, as GM did in cars before them. And let's commend those smaller companies/divisions that have invested in and moved mirrorless technology forward rather than paying them left-handed compliments.
Like to see a re-write by Richard Butler or Barney Britton, I'm sure it would have a different tone.
what sales that show MILC's remain static or constant?
as a good example: Olympus is venting stock in a big way right now in japan.
is it better to sell a 3K camera body to a customer for, well, 3K - or sell a 750 kit for 300?
what's more indicative of a healthy market?
Just a Photographer: "If Canon is so frightened of cannibalizing its own entry-level DSLRs it could have participated in the mirrorless market with a camera that wouldn't compete with them."
Canon is playing it stupid here - Cannibalizing your own market is still always better then to be eaten by your competitors.
Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras are here to stay. They won't disappear because Canon or Nikon refuses to seriously enter that marketsegment.
As a matter of fact the longer Canon and Nikon will be waiting, the more people will switch to either Sony or Fuji. Two major players in the MILC market that do take these cameras seriously. While Sony might have cameras with better sensors, Fuji is building up (and now already has) a very strong lens line-up that can easily compete with Canons L-Lenses and Nikon's goldring lenses.
IMHO If Canon took mirrorless more seriously I don't think I would have switched brands. Their unwillingness to take this market seriously will hurt them in the end.
Fuji is a major player? yeah. okay.
hard to say 57even, we're also seeing the impact of sony pulling back heavily from selling DSLR's and also canon and Nikon shortening up their inventory.
Trending on shipments can be deceiving. speaking of shipments, Olympus has something like 4.7 months worth of excess inventory - meaning they overshipped by a significant margin, propping up those MILC numbers.
what I do find interesting which is a more interesting trend is what is happening in terms of lenses.japan post purchase lens sales are more MILC orientated, not so much anywhere else. however 4 out of the top 5 even in japan are SLR lenses, and 6 out of the top 10. in the USA, the top 10 is all SLR lenses, Europe, the top 10 again, is all SLR.
speaking of blinders. at least I don't invent claims.. such as "X-T1 is selling VERY well domestically"
so let's see. overall BCN for the year of 2014. hmm 5.1% of the market.
how could it be selling well of ALL of Fuji's cameras only merit 5.1% in the domestic realm?
well damn, well maybe you're right - maybe the X-T1 is the only Fuji selling? let's check bcn data. X-A1 position 50. ouch.
yes, you are so right, it's selling so well, it doesn't even make the top 80 in bcn..
okay .. well maybe bcn is out to lunch I mean they only check receipts from 50% of all stores.. but heck .. hardly a good sample size..
amazon.co.jp should tell us something..looking at MILC bestsellers..
X-M1 at postion 42 ! X-E1 at 52! X-E1 54.. and no X-T1.
wow.. not even on amazon.co.jp
and ps .. only position 26 for MILC's on amazon.com even. where bigger MILC's tend to sell better.
why? they should be proud of that.
name another APS-C or larger vendor that can cover 11-200mm (or 18-300) in good to excellent optical quality with minimal software corrections, weigh in at less than 1.5lb in total for the three lenses, and cost less than 1100 USD?
sony will set you back around 1300 or so, and arguably worse quality unless you get the 16-70 zeiss. which of course is more than the entire three lens kit that goes 11-200 ;)
Fuji.. not much difference there. Samsung is probably the closest and only one that comes close.
Shmuel Goldberg: It must be clear that there is absolutely nothing in physics of a DSLR that makes it better than a mirrorless camera. Weight and size of DSLRs is not an advantage, it is a result of outdated technology. An idea that was excellent 75 years ago makes no sense today.
hmm actually the styling of compact rangefinders is older.
modern SLR technology only came about in the late 50's early 60's .. verus 30's for rangefinders.
even then SLR's were a lot smaller - SLR's became big when the lenses were big. a bigger SLR is just easier to handle with large lenses.
The era of the modern EOS design was actually really with the T90 - which was pretty small actually. that was in 1986. hmm not 75 years there either. dammit.
hand hold a 24-70/2.8L II + 600EX RT flash all day with just your fingertips because the body is so small that your hand doesn't properly support it and get back to me.
Zvonimir Tosic: Canon sees no profit in it so they won't waste their name on it. And there is no profit in it at all, or perhaps very little for one player. Others are suffocating.The whole mirrorless game is a fad and a race to the bottom. Also a horrible age for optics, because we are being fed with heavily compromised optics for systems (garbage in quality and nightmare of a design) that cannot even produce a decent image without heavy software cooking behind it. If the optics is done right for the mirrorless, it would be bigger than for the SLR!So I am not certain why some people are raving for something that moves entire values and hallmarks of photographic and optical ideals and design in the dumpster?
the quite impressive Olympus PRO 12-40mm 2.8 .. the crowning achievement of m43'dom .. the pinnacle of modern optics..
has a 8.5% distortion on the wide end.
hidden of course by the cameras.
straylightrun: The answer is no. Canon is too concerned mirrorless will cannibilize their DSLR lines and cheapen their brand name and reputation.
actually the 11-22 is probably outside of the 16-35mm canon's best UWA.
the EF-M line pretty much looks like it's going to match the EF-S line, the M bodies are looking very much domestically as being bundled and sold just like rebel cameras are.
so how's canon afraid again? Canon Rebel's are their cash cow, and their major sales product.
they churn out more rebels in a month then all MILC' vendors combined.
The average consumer of the rebel camera probably uses their kit zooms and not much more than that.
Mirrorless Crusader: The "arrival" of the M3? It's not arriving in the U.S. which is supposed to be its biggest market. How could anyone with a single functioning brain cell think that keeping a new product out of the US means a company is taking that product and its technology seriously?
It's truly incredible how DPR is actually paying people tens of thousands of dollars a year to be less knowledgeable than most of its forum posters. And I haven't even gotten to the part about the M3 being a joke of an upgrade, kind of like how the Rebel went almost 6 years since 2009 barely changing anything until just now. Canon just doesn't get it. Period.
you obviously need a nap.
actually Europe is the biggest camera market.
Japan and Asia basically tie in camera units shipped.
oh and canon and Nikon both sold more 3K camera bodies than any MILC out there, I doubt they share your opinion.
heck even the D600 outsold MILC's..
of course what you didn't write was the fact that CIPA data shows a shipment adjustment in November 2013, and no growth since - as a matter of fact it fell. the shipment adjustment was probably simply simply cutting back on SLT shipments and adding A7's. as a market penetration, the growth of MILC's is rather low.
Of course .. 18% sounds amazing, but let's put some numbers to that. only 73,000 more units were shipped over to NA than the year prior. Shipped. Not Sold. simply Shipped.
the total MILC volume shipped was only 481K to north America - this against what.. 1.3 million DSLR's that canon alone shipped? the 2.7 million SLR's that canon and Nikon shipped (and the 20 slt's as well)
to put this into perspective what you are flag waving as amazing growth - is a 15% gobal MILC marketshare of a 24% ILC markeshare, or only 3.6% in total ILC marketshare.
your AMAZING 18% constitutes a total of .42% growth for ILC's.
funny I didn't pick the X-A1 at all.
I did however pick current cameras that are around the same physical size as the M/M3 all of which surprisingly don't have EVF's.
Heck the A5100 doesn't even have a hotshoe for the love of god.
point is that other vendors make cameras that sell quite well (the PEN series is the top selling series of cameras in Japan. period. by a freaking MILE) and it doesn't have an EVF.
NEX-5T sells well too for Sony in Japan. EVF? nopers.
as a matter of fact it's hard to find a camera that really sells well domestically that has an EVF.
So serious about MILC's means you have to have an EVF attached and thus a bigger camera? oh please.
how the bloody heck are billions of cameras used every day without a damned EVF?
maybe just maybe the generation coming up .. really doesn't give a damn about an EVF.
ProfHankD: I don't think Canon is very afraid. I think they're mostly trapped in a development cycle that keeps most subsystems unchanged across many years, upgrading only one or two at a time. This year, apparently susbsystem they are most proud of is the new mirror drive mechanism... which isn't helping them make a more viable mirrorless product!
Anyway, the EOS M3 is headed in the right direction, but incremental evolution hasn't been fast enough to keep up with Sony or Samsung. No point in releasing the M3 in the US where it would probably hurt sales by effectively blessing the approach better executed by Sony, etc. The lack of native lenses isn't a big problem in reality, because the M models all support adapting EF and EF-S lenses (Canon couldn't re-engineer more than a few per year as native EOS-M mount anyway).
BTW, I have an EOS-M, and overall it is severely outperformed by my Sonys (even the original NEX-5), but I have it because it can be reprogrammed using Magic Lantern (ML).
that mirror mechanism first came out on the 7D II actually. they mentioned it because of all the issuses surrounding mirror slap, shutter shock and what not with high resolution sensors the last little while.
I think the thing they are most proud of is probably the amazing 11-24mm.