VENTURE-STAR: Maybe the reason for Canon not giving North Americans priority to buy this camera is something to do with economics and they recognize that the Eurozone and Far East are bigger potential markets for products like this? Whatever the reason, who cares? Wouldn't it be more interesting just to discuss the actual camera here? If Americans are so desperate to buy one, I'm sure they can do so quite easily online, probably tax free with an international warranty.
You're correct about everything except the warranty.
justmeMN: Canon USA gets a Timidity Gold Award.
They are so afraid of failure, that they don't even try.
It's workin'. They are in the least bad shape of all the companies.
67gtonr: I have been using my EOS M for over 1 1/2 years without issue, I have been following any posts about the system online and in the EOS M Forum here and have not once come across a post about needing to have an M repaired for something under warranty, no overheating when taking video, no banding, no oil or dust on the sensor, no shutter slap issues, etc. I am confident that this iteration will also have the high quality build of its predecessors.
How about "The sensor is just too big for a camera so small!" or "$300 for an APS camera with interchangeable lenses is robbery!"
Charrick: I don't really care so much, because I wouldn't buy the M3 anyway, but I wonder how hard it is to just release something in another country. I mean, I am 100% sure that in the Japanese versions there is an English menu option (along with French, German, Korean, Chinese, etc). Why is it so hard to just bring it over? I understand that stores only have so much shelf-space, and Canon might want to reserve that space for its other cameras, but how about online sales? It is exceedingly strange that Canon isn't even trying anymore in the mirrorless category.
Pretty sure they will sell it in Canada. Until recently they shipped 3 of the 4 lenses to Canada but now all 4 are on the website.
JohnK: The model holding the camera in these photos should have had a manicure, fresh nail polish and hand makeup. IMO, the unappealing appearance of the hands is a distraction. Or is it an editorial comment? :) IMO a photography website should do better than this.
As for the camera, I live in the U.S. and have two L lenses I'd like to shoot with a Canon MILC, why not sell it in U.S.? Are they ashamed of it? Is it not good enough for the demanding U.S. market :)
These shows are long hours and huge jet lag. Sometimes the cosmetic stuff takes a back seat.
justmeMN: I guess Canon doesn't want to popularize the concept of mirrorless cameras in the USA. Here, most people have never heard of a mirrorless camera, and Canon wants to keep it that way.
Maybe they got as big as they are by not selling stuff people don't want. I like my EOS-M, have the 4 lenses and will get this new one but I don't kid myself that other people in my area are all that interested.
The fans will see this as a competition between Canon and Nikon, even Sony. But for real users, a bigger problem is that these cameras don't seem to offer much more than the existing Canons. Forget about Canon vs. Nikon; how about Canon vs. Canon?
AlephNull: 8 people already claiming to have had these...
Ken Rockwell got both models last year. He says they're ok, so long as you shoot jpgs.
This is good news for photo magazines, websites and LensRentals. Being introduced along with 50mp cameras, I'm sure it's wonderfully sharp. It will be interesting to see what looks attractive at 11mm.
But why, oh why, is it that Canon can meet or exceed Nikon in lens quality, variety, even price, but the bodies are never as nice? This was true in the film era too, so they've had some time to work on it.
Whoops! The problem is, the person who desperately "needs" 50mp is the same person who also wants lots of dynamic range.
Same for the ISO. Nobody needs 100,000,000 ISO but having a low ISO range suggests one thing: noise.
What a brag fest we will be treated to between the D810 owners and the 5Ds owners. DxO says this; DxO says that. Oy vey.
Looks quite nice. Keeping the EVF separate would have made sense if it kept the price down. I was thinking $600-700 and the customer doesn't really figure on the EVF but buys it later.
$900 + $250 for the EVF is steep, but the thing is small, the sensor is decent-sized and the lenses are a bargain. Hopefully it will be a little cheaper in Canada.
stevo23: So underwhelming. Not sure why they bothered with this.
Richard, I normally agree with you (and your handgrips are a godsend) but there is a difference between solving a problem vs. inventing a technology that is ingenious but not very practical. It's like inventing a 72 exposure roll of film and then realizing cameras only count up to 36.
What it is good for, is something to put in a press release, especially when a lot of other products are released at the same time.
Peiasdf: DOOMED before it even came out. SONY A900/A850 came out when the competitions only have 5D2 and D700 at $600-$800 more and A900/A850 didn't make a dent in the FF market. SONY also have a full line of FF lenses for the Alpha twins.
Now the competitions have 6D, 5D3, 5D4, D610, D750, D810, DF not to mention SONY's A7 series. Pentax lenses for the last 15 years are also all geared toward APS-C.
No one seems to have considered that that struggling Pentax will have to compete against their own used lenses that are available cheap. And no, most of them will not become that expensive because it will turn out they are not quite up to full frame digital standards. But they will be good enough, given the price difference.
If you have the lenses and the phone, why not? The only downside I can see is that Apple has probably copyrighted "air".
ptox: Hilariously predictable responses to the high res mode.
Instead of taking it as a cool new feature on top of an already excellent camera, commenters are judging Olympus as though it's trying to market this as a 40MP body--we'd probably see fewer criticisms of the MkII if they'd just excluded the feature altogether.
Nevermind that a 40MP full-color-fidelity mode makes this a monster for most product photography, quite a lot of architecture work, and certain landscapes--and that the camera is a pretty worthy upgrade over the original to boot; no, Olympus is just selling us "gimmicks"...
For a bunch of photographers, there's a distinct lack of imagination here.
Here's my predictable response. Getting 40 mp out of a small camera via a method that makes many types of photos impossible is the very essence of a solution looking for a problem.
As for the things this feature is good for, like product and architecture (maybe) there is no need to have a small camera for these types of photography.
justmeMN: The 40 MP multi-exposure mode would be good for landscapes, if you live in an area that never has wind. :-)
That could mean slow sales in Chicago.
I love Ricoh's better stuff and certainly nothing wrong with Takumar lenses. But what is the compelling reason people would pay these prices, plus buy a new body to go with their new lenses, and sell their Nikon/Canon/Sony at a loss? Unless its someone who can afford FF but won't buy one unless it's a Pentax, I guess.
nerd2: One fun fact - guess who made the first FF DSLR? It's Contax.
And they're still going strong!
Well, the full frame segment isn't as crowded as the others so if it's cheap enough, you never know.... Or it could just be a way of saying we're still here.
Rick_Hunter: KEN ROCKWELL USES THIS. (enough said)
Occasionally accurate information finds it's way into Ken's site. It isn't a common occurrence but with a product like this he's entitled to his opinion. I'm sure he gets a spiff if you buy it so that makes it pretty fantastic product.