T3: That's exactly how I see mirrorless: universal mount cameras so you're not stuck in any one particular lens system. Even better if the mirrorless camera has IBIS. Then you also have universal image stabilization across all lenses.
If you were a camera company why would you want to let customers use lenses other than your company's lenses?! That is unless you don't make any lenses.
D200_4me: "Sony has a huge lineup of their own lenses" They do? I counted 11 FE lenses on their site. I guess he's talking about any lens that you can adapt. Honestly, for me...adapted lenses can kiss my rear end. :-) I want native lenses.
Dude, a-mount isn't a mirrorless mount.
minzaw: uNIVERSAL MOUNT IS A pENTAX k-01 ............ without ANY ADAPTOR FITS all NATIVE pk pENTAX LENS FROM 1960s TO DATE
No, they just kept the same k-mount. That isn't a universal mount. Think universal remote and you should understand what the topic is.
Dude, mirrorless isn't a mount. It's a type of camera. sony is e-mount, Canon is EF-M mount.
J. Qian: It's never worthwhile money wise to buy a high premium gadget that goes obsolete in a few years, unless you want to own the brand no matter what.
Lenses are not gadgets, dude.
Full frame what? They make medium format too. So is this 35mm or medium format? Your article should spell that out right at the start. "Full frame" itself is not a format !
KameraFever: Freakin huge! But that's the price to pay for being an awesome lens. I'm really glad Sigma is putting out such a high quality line of lenses at very reasonable pricing. Sigma's offering either match or better the canikon counterparts. This particular lens looks like it has no equal.
Usually the bigger the item the better it can perform. Goes for many different types of products. Just like tiny image sensors are poor compared to big ones.
Oh, it's ideal for snapshots! $900 for a snapshot lens!
Lee Jay: If they want to sell more than a handful, it needs to be $299, not $3,299.
snik: show your proof for your made up outlandish claim.
Canon announces new cameras and trolls come out from under the bridges in droves!
aut0maticdan: Sorry, if it has a dedicated record button, it should have 4K these days. Its like not including raw in a stills camera. They aren't priced low enough to exclude it. These cameras are all dead to me.
Do you go through life calling out all the things that are "dead to you" that you don't like? Really. Must be a sad way to live, concentrating on your negatives!
dwill23: 24-72mm is what the 15-45mm will be like.
HOWEVER.... 3.5-6.3?? OUCH. Dark.
I would love if Canon made more than just one prime (the 22mm f2.0, which is excellent). Until then I'll be using the adapter with my Sigma Art lenses, but then it's big.
Maybe I'll buy this lens for my San Francisco trip coming up.
I own an M3.
Yep, 1/3 stop isn't an issue. The lens is meant to be small as is the m10.
NoMirror99: Ok Canon guys, I come in peace. What am I missing? At these prices you could get a Sony a6000. Why on earth would someone want one of these instead? I really don't get it.
Nomirror: you are here to cause trouble.
Marcos Villaroman: If these new cameras focus as slowly as the G7X, I'm not interested.
It has more focusing points so the focusing no doubt will be better.
You aren't coming in peace. Anyone who says "not to be rude" will then be rude.
achim k: a few days too late, Canon! I was waiting for years for a small camera with a good viewfinder and meanwhile gave up hoping for Canon. I bought an Olympus OM-D E-M 10 Mk.II with small pancake zoom these days. Not really much bigger, but interchangeable lenses, bigger sensor and same price.
Sorry but you are talking different camera types: compact fixed lens vs mirrorless /evil.
iudex: I wanted to critisize the G9x for slow lens but then I realized I had a Canon S100 a couple of year back and it had f2-5,9 lens despite having small 1/1,7" sensor. This camera is comparatively big (or better say small) but has a much bigger sensor in it. Ideal for people who know nothing about photography, do not want a big camera but want a decent outcome (which the 1" Sony sensor surely delivers).
A few years ago a 1/1.7" sensor was larger not "small"
Arn: I see people complaining about how the 5Gx looks and that tells to me that Canon has really done well with this camera. If the biggest issue is esthetics, then there's not much wrong. A camera like this is not a fashion accessory, it's a photographic tool. The 5Gx ticks all the right boxes for me - a great EVF, a fully articulated LCD and remarkably well laid out controls. These features combined with the well performing Canon image stabilisation provide are something that are lacking on Sony's RX100 series. As I'm mostly a stills photographer, so I'm not too concerned about missing RX100IV video features. So,I'm thinking this camera should appeal to a lot of people focused on stills photography.
G5 X not 5Gx
maximme: so it seems Dual Pixel is NOT getting wide spread application.....
That's because it's likely not a Canon manufactured sensor.