rrccad: so out of all these, only one would I consider the be "astro-photography" which is a challenging discipline in it's own right.
the rest i consider nightscapes. it's a shame that only one DSO made it on this list, as photographing DSO's is a technological challenge , extreme patience and time far exceeding that of the regular nightscape photograph.
Astrolandscape - I like that, and suits it for sure.
so out of all these, only one would I consider the be "astro-photography" which is a challenging discipline in it's own right.
RichRMA: Anyone looking at this would be advised (if high definition is their goal) to look into an alternative, custom apochromatic telescopes from Companies like AstroPhysics (U.S.) APM in Germany or TEC in Colorado. They'll provide better images (or at least as good) as the Canon for about 1/8 to 1/4 of the price. But it's likely a well-heeled collector will grab up the Canon.
a 220mm Flourite APO refractor? you're kidding right?
at 150K or so .. that actually may be cheap.
astrophyics only has a 175mm f/8 triplet for 21K no flourite.
Michael Piziak: Looks like a lot of electronic parts to break down.
I'm sorry I love my FD lenses, but they show their signs of age, with CA, loCA and lack of general crispness.
oh right you can use film .. if that's the case why are you even on this thread anyways - it pertains nothing to do you. since you're stuck in the dark ages of even lens design because something may break. Especially with your own self professed dislike to canon. just stirring up things? I'm curious if your posted on any other lens threads pertaining to quality of materials.. gasps. none. go figure!
RichRMA: Even with a red band, half plastic...
ironically i've seen metal lenses get bent out of shape from a light drop and zoom / focus being compromised - i doubt that would happen nearly as easily with engineered plastics.
lol .. yeah because the cameras we put them on now have no electronics at all.. derp.
i mean really - comparing this to any old MF lens is kind of a chuckle - because back in the MF days, there was no such thing has high performing UWA's under 21mm with around the OM 15mm being about the only notable exception. even the C/Y 15mm wasnt that great
Boky: 7 or 8 years ago I pulled apart the 24-105 L F4 because I could not obtain consistently accurate focus. The PCB (almost identical to photo #2) had a large number of very high inductance chokes placed everywhere across the whole PCB. The only reason why such chokes had to be used was to combat a large amount of noise generated mainly by the lens electronics, but also to filter the noise coming from the camera power supply, i.e. the voltage rails used to power-up the lens. I was shocked to see what canon had to do to keep the noise under control. I also could not believe at the amount of placement tolerance the AF (auto-focus) sensor PCB, located at the bottom of the camera body; I was able to move the little AF PCB freely with my fingers in both directions more than 0.5mm. Needless to say, I sold everything and never looked back at canon gear for achieving consistent focus results. The canon gear I owned was not cheap - around AU$4,500.
LOL omg.. a pcb could shift..
peevee1: Investment in marketing by this company is impressive. R&D... not so much.
yes because the over 3 billion usd that canon spends on R&D isn't enough in your books.
Bernard Carns: Another typical letdown from Canon.The last cameras I've bought have NOT been from them.When are they going to finally do something worth someone's attention?
have some kleenix that a canon india announcement let's you down...
no great surprise consider canon japan usually posts the real teasers.
it's a sweet competition though.
mpgxsvcd: At least they didn't call it the T6i. Seriously Canon is designing in reverse. They are undoing everything that was great about their cameras before.
or maybe a pacifier?
do you need a kleenix or a blankie?
quiquae: Never ceases to amaze me how people keep waltzing in to give self-righteous pontifications about this low-end superzoom that they were never going to buy anyway.
LOL Quiquae .. right?! there's some that are certainly sniveling away.
oddly enough it's always the same ones .. every .. single time..
Sad Joe: WELL DONE FUJI ! As a Canon & Nikon user I do wonder how many of the 'improvements' newer cameras have could come via clever software updates….Ps - I love my two EOS-M's (no really - forget the negative reviews its a GREAT pocket DSLR) but I tried out a Fuji TX-1 at a wedding recently - superb. The pro I was working with is seriously considering selling off his FF Nikon kit he's that impressed with his TX-1. Perhaps Nikon & Canon should consider what this means to their business rather than half baked upgrades such as the D610 & D810 or a Canon 5d4 ????
well done for what? adding in a print button? :P
yes because canon's never done major firmware releases or done fixes to older cameras via firmware before. o.O
considering most of these are bug fixes anyways, something both manufacturers do.
Dave Luttmann: Too much time is wasted on comparing ridiculously high iso ratings that make up such a minute amount of where photographers normally reside. There must be a small underground movement of people producing 20x30 landscape, street, or portraiture at 100,000 iso that I must be missing.
but to be honest .. people shooting this high would be image stacking, and gaining alot more resolution and detail back.or they should be ;)
jenbenn: What you forgot to mention is that the 5D has vastly superior dynamic range in all shots. The highlights in the sony raws are all blown out while the canon retains considerably more detail.
BTW I own a 5d III and a Sony A7 (non-r). The canon consistantly delivers less noise and better dynamic range at all isos above 400. The exception being at iso 100 and iso200 where the sony has less shadow noise if you need to lift the shadows dramatically.
To complete this: Any test site (hint: DXO) rating the canon sensor far below the sony sensor, should start using their cameras to take photos instead of performing absurd measurebating tests which do not translate into real life.
there is something weird going on about the highlights coming off these images, the A7R / A7S are consistently blowing out some areas versus the 5D shot. maybe highlight headroom - versus the sony which has better shadow detail. and lol @ marc.. world doesn't revolve around a test site that uses faulty measurements and certainly doesn't publish "how" they do it.
67gtonr: At 21 months on the market the EOS M already has five auto focusing EF-M mount lenses in addition to the 17 EF-M mount manual focus lenses and of course the 100 or so EF and EF-S mount lenses that are fully compatible with the use of a $75 Canon adapter. Of course there are the over 100 million used Canon lenses available as well.
lol . yes, because canon certainly doesn't manufacturer best in class lenses for the EF mount. oh wait .. you changed gears again to try and bash..
6D you mean the best selling full frame camera in north america - I guess they got the features pretty right.
so? it's their only camera mount - i would hope to hell they manage to produce lenses for it.
and btw, Fuji has only produced 12 of those. that that great at all all things considered.
zsedcft: I have just gone back to eos-m as my compact camera of choice. I bought an RX100 because the glacial focusing of the eos-m (and inability to focus is low light) was killing me. The RX100 is so close to being perfect but Sony, as usual, destroy their amazing hardware with stupid software. The two that I couldn't tolerate are the lack of interval timer mode (with no option for remote control, although I believe that the RX100 II does this with a smartphone app) and the pathetic max 0.7eV, 3 shot bracket. I just don't understand the second one; Sony had already gone to the trouble of making a bracket function but then they decided to arbitrarily limit it to 0.7eV.
The EOS-m can bracket much wider using the default firmware, but "tragic lantern" opens up a world of possibilities when it comes to timelapse etc.
I am pretty sure that canon are going to release a new version later in the year. I'll probably wait for the inevitable fire-sale and pick up a great camera for half off.
@John C Tharp not on mine.. the 11-22 is pretty much instant focus. 18-55 a little slower .. and the 22mm certainly slow. Now i usually roll with one shot AF, non-flexizone though - YMMV in AI servo and flexizone AF.
what len(s) are you using on the M? either the 18-55 or 11-22 are slow to focus .. i do find the 22/2 pretty sluggish though. also make sure you updated your firmware.