BlueBomberTurbo: Glad I didn't hold my breath and got a NEX-6 instead. -______- Canon's become as lazy as American car manufacturers. Wonder if Japan has a bailout program...
Except Canon make a lot of money selling cameras, all the mirrorless companies lose a lot of money, except Sony who now make a small amount of money as they merged the profitable Pro Video division with the camera division and the Video division makes a bit more profit than the camera division loses.
R N: hey, gang -- no reason to panic. This is so modest a refresh that it makes no sense to market it in the US or Europe. Now if they bring out a dual-pixel M series camera for Asia only, then you can panic.
Seriously, nothing to worry about here. Move along, move along...
Not my cup of tea, but the people I know who have EOS-Ms like them a lot, plus they're dirt cheap. (My m43 spend this year, one camera and two lenses, would get me about 8 EOS-M kits with lens and EF adapter at the best prices I've seen, which was about UKP300 when the adapter was bundled for free.)
IVAN is picturing: Ok when I read the M2 announcement, I just could not believe it is true. And release only in Japan and China?? Looking at the censor/exterior, I can't help but think is it because canon just have too much eos m1 remains to clear? We all know eos m is reducing it is price dramatically. Clearly they will not be profitable as forecast and consumers aren't buying as they wish. So what to do with the remaining materials? Just adding in new wifi and other features to remaining eos m1 materials and there you go: eos m2 with optimized profit again!
Seems obvious, everyone's losing money in mirrorless cameras, so just stick to the markets where you're in with a chance. (Canon and Nikon have 80% of the US interchangeable lens camera market, that leaves mirrorless and the other DSLRs - Sony, Pentax - fighting over the rest, while all losing money.)
67gtonr: The M is Considerably larger than the GM1 in only one aspect and that is sensor size, and this M2 is even smaller than the M!
For a walk-around compact lens you'd go with these:http://camerasize.com/compact/#496.349,491.397,ha,t
Timmbits: hmmm, lets see... about the same size as a GM1 (slightly larger, but with larger sensor also), but less lenses available for it. Canon is still on the fence as to whether it's time to allow their whole rage of cameras evolve into mirrorless... until then, EOSM will be nothing but a GM1 equivalent. That's a moot topic though, as the real cameras are the OMD, GX7, NX20, A7, Fuji... for mirrorless.
Using the classic walk-around lenses there isn't much in it, the Panny lens zooms and the Canon lens captures a lot more light...http://camerasize.com/compact/#496.349,491.397,ha,tI think next year's rumoured EOS-M with Dual Pixel AF will be much more exciting though.
The down-side is a lack of EF-M lenses, although 2014 may bring several. Tho via the adapter you can add World-class telephotos with AF (which you can also easily rent), something m43 doesn't have (alas, as an m43 user, plus Panny canceled their in-dev one).
I'll stick with m43, I like the 35-100's size too much, but everyone I know with EOS-Ms (3 people last time I looked) loves them.
BTW since Canon make a lot of money making cameras and all the mirrorless-only makers lose a lot of money it's a bit rich to suggest they don't know what they are doing. They often aren't first to a market segment (in the case of video it was a bit of an accident) but they often end up controlling it by the time it's making money.
Dr_Jon: You say "Which isn't to say the focus is bad - our first impressions are that the performance is consistent with Canon's EOS 70D, which offers some of the best live view focus of a conventional DSLR. However, for the very best performance, the E-M1 should be used with Micro Four Thirds lenses."Am I correct in assuming you mean in LV mode, or do you mean with the mirror-down?
STM lenses are really best for video, the USM lenses are still the speed kings for stills, especially the ring USM ones (most of the better ones).
I don't know about IBIS (I have a GH3) but the Canon IS is still the best lens stabilisation I've seen (despite lots of publicity by the assorted competition), it's certainly better than my Panasonic lenses (14-140, 12-35, 35-100).
One thing Canon are doing is making a lot of shorter lenses with IS, you don't really need this for still photography but it's essential for hand-held video. (Although I have given up using my 5DmkII for video and it's just the GH3 now, but the 5DmkII stills do have better IQ than the GH3. Plus Canon still make lots of lenses you can't get in m43, and won't for a long time.)
BTW with Canon LV is for video (hopefully) and use the OVF and PDAF for stills, e.g. see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHhvvN4_RTk&feature=em-uploademail for a 7D in action.
Err, the bit in quotes mentioning the 70D is from their text!
I think some 43 users will care whether it's as good as or better than the E5 (which isn't that fast by modern standards), especially if they have a lot of the high-end 43 glass. Most people want to know how it compares to modern equivalent-priced DSLRs, plus m43, to find out if they can add the 43 lenses to the list they can consider getting. (If you have an E-M5 and want better quality longer glass should you get an E-M1 plus 43 glass or a 7D and L glass, for example.)
You say "Which isn't to say the focus is bad - our first impressions are that the performance is consistent with Canon's EOS 70D, which offers some of the best live view focus of a conventional DSLR. However, for the very best performance, the E-M1 should be used with Micro Four Thirds lenses."Am I correct in assuming you mean in LV mode, or do you mean with the mirror-down?
Frank_BR: Something is very strange in this history.
The Zuiko 75mm F1.8 lens was announced in Feb 8, 2012. However, according to the Egami blog the Sigma patent's filing date is Feb 3, 2012, that is, only five days before the announcement.
On the other hand, after a lens design starts, it takes months, if not years, until the production (and announcement) effectively happens. So, it is not reasonable to think that Sigma started the design process of that lens long before filing the patent application.
The only requirement for a patent is to file before the product is announced. It's not uncommon to leave it to the last minute, aside from anything else it gives you a longer time to play with the patent before it is finalised. Plus less notice for the competition of what you're doing. I remember the Canon EFCS feature, launched in the 40D, has the patent filed only a little while before the 40D was announced.
bronxbombers4: " "Such a product is not just unpacked. We want the “unboxing experience” to be something that is really special and representative about this unique product." "
Hah something about this quote just makes me laugh.Reminds me of the whole $3000 Hassy versions of the Sony RX100M2.
(that said, I'm sure this lens will be pretty cool, unlike the Hassy RX100M2)
They've done a souped-up RX100 too...
Actually 35mm is a good size compromise and so will keep going for some time. It does depend on how many pixels people want in their sensor (partly for crop-to-zoom, partly specmanship, partly printing large).
The bigger the sensor the more light you can collect for sensible f-stop lenses (remember a FF f2 lens collects 4x the light of a m43 f2 lens) plus, for a set number of pixels, the further you can stop down before diffraction nukes the image sharpness (diffraction depending basically just on pixel size and aperture).
If you want to shoot at f22 you don't want m43, for example. (Yes, m43 gets extra DoF at lower f-stop, but less light gathered at faster f-stop, all a trade-off.)
Waterengineer: If sensor size maters then why is the medium format (MF) camera industry basically dead? Why isn't there a consumer MF camera if sensor size matters?
It's not dead, a number of firms make good money out of it. It's just the cameras are physically too big for it to be a volume business, and as volumes go down prices go up (any low-volume car maker would be an example). This isn't an issue with 35mm sensors and down, as people have shown they are prepared to carry them around in great numbers for a number of decades. The sensor manufacturing issues could be fixed if the demand was there, but it isn't.
P.S. 35mm is 36x24, I assume a simple typo... or two... I'm not going with Horizontal tho, suddenly all sensors would be native 16:9...
The cool thing from Adobe's point of view is if the revenue isn't what the CEO would like he can simply hike the rental price and it's magically more. The users are faced with pay or lose all access to the software they rely on. Great to be a new CEO, you can instantly boost profits and get a big bonus...
Lousy for consumers who tend to go much longer between upgrades due to limited finances, but will scrape together the money to buy the product when they can.
As many consumers bought CS6 not knowing it was a dead-end (due to people's limited budgets) I think Adobe should put all the initial CC upgrades into a CS6.5 version and do it as a free/very cheap upgrade (they have CS6 on a silly tax rule that makes free difficult for them). At least that way their customers will feel less ripped off. Of course they might be happy permanently losing all those "only buy a copy every 4-5 years" customers for the bonus rental income, plus turning them into anti-adobe evangelists, who knows...
Mister J: Snake-oil suit talk.
I guess we're all now looking for a Photoshop replacement.
Pixelmator is some of the way there, but still crashes and hangs, so development needed. Even so, they must be drooling at the market opportunity.
As for Lightroom, Aperture is the excellent alternative.
FCP is now a pretty good video editor.
InDesign? Quark is improving by the day, and is well priced.
I can't think of an Illustrator alternative, but maybe there's one I don't know about.
I use CS6 Extended and will stay with it rather than moving to CC. I use DXO for Raw processing, but do have LR4 too.
Of the free tools I think Pixbuilder Studio is the best. I went through about 30 different free photo editing programs looking for one to recommend and I think it was clearly ahead of the others.
Why do you never bring up the issue of semiconductor wafer yields? I.e. you can’t expect to get nearly as many usable sensors for 35mm as you can from m43. To be clear, this is above and beyond the fact that m43 is ~ ¼ the size of 35mm. I.e. if Canon were making m43 sensors and had the same standards of quality control for both m43 and 35mm formats, it would get *significantly less than* ¼ the number of usable sensors for its 35mm format cameras than it would for m43. I assume you’re aware of this (which makes it puzzling why you’re not including it in the “equivalence” curriculum), but if not, just google “digital camera wafer yields” or something similar, and you’ll quickly understand.
Small point - most sensors have a few dud pixels in there, it takes a major fault to stop them using one.
Okay, so for everyone who glazed over after the 997th misleading post on equivalence there is a good one buried in the middle about how Panasonic only designed the 150/2.8 so someone could do a coffee mug from it... :-)
IMHO almost all the equivalence posts are wrong as they miss out on various important facts. FF and m43 are both great camera systems (well, now m43 finally has a couple of decent sensors available). For best quality and the best overall system FF is where it's at, for something you can carry around all day and get decent photos m43 is the way to go (or Fuji XE1, or NEX6, or RX100, ...).
Ganondorf: What the hell does un-damped mean??
It means it doesn't stop smoothly when you stop turning it. No (or little) resistance to turning.
Leonard Shepherd: The 4th reply from Mosswings is part right on the money. Those who understand optics know when the sensor and lens each has equal resolution the image resolution (what we are interested in) is 42% lower than either measured in isolation.Confirming the average loss is 45% is no more than reinventing the wheel!I see no advantage in relating lens performance to human vision. The human eye perceives time at 1/60th of a second. With electronic flash we can record movement much shorter and with a tripod much longer than 1/60, creating visual movement impressions impossible without using a camera.Many use wide angle and telephoto lenses to create visual angles of view the unaided fixed angle eye cannot perceive. In macro we can record detail much too small for the eye to see.D and O have come up with a formula to make themselves look better than others. The reality is they give the impression of not having a clue as to what most photographers think photography is about.
Actually it's a sum of squares job, you lose just under 30% from two identical resolution devices. Hence if the lens and camera can both resolve 21MP you'd get 14.8MP of resolution in theory, although I doubt DXO calculate it that way.
An interesting thought, as someone who paid nine hundred quid for CS6 Extended (actually PS version 13.0) then found that when they fixed some of the nasties in the crop tool (in 13.1, only for CC) I gather I won't get that fix until CS7 comes out and I pay to upgrade... I assume they won't update the retail boxed version, so if I paid my £900 next Jan I wouldn't even get the latest version?
atodzia: Adobe is making a big mistake by doing this. I will never use the cloud. What happens when your internet is down?
Well, unless you usually work on your desktop then grab your notebook, which you haven't used in a month, and head off to a customer site or holiday...
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review