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.
They're simply designing cameras people will buy. Perhaps not you or I or many on these forums, but enthusiants and geeks don't have more money than those just looking for something for snapshots. Canon is being smart and catering to pretty much every level of photographer excepting those with phone cameras, large format, and so far medium format. Seriously, if you can't get the shot with something Canon makes, then the problem is not the equipment. We'll see what the future brings, but whatever it is, most likely Canon will be right there doing what they've done for a long time - making profits.
mpix345: Not sure this camera could be any less exciting.
Forgot about writing this? "... so many folks make a camera out to be garbage because of some feature that doesn't suit them specifically."
Zigadiboom: Hmmm if this camera had a constant f1.2 aperture throughout the entire zoom range where it could just slip into your pocket it might have maybe had half a chance against the likes of the Panasonic FZ-1000 and Sony RX10.
Certainly you can't think this camera is marketed to the same buyer and purpose as those you mentioned, so I'll give you be benefit of the doubt and believe you to be a master of sarcastic wit.
Chris Noble: Interesting advertisement. We prefer impartial and comparative reviews.
I don't know what's going on with these multiple posts form mobile devices. Maybe it's me.
We? It seems like the vast majority on these boards only wants their favorite brand lauded. Every review is met with 'why didn't my brand get a gold award?' or shouts of bias and claims the writers are paid to advertise for certain brands and mounts. There's no 'we' but a quiet minority in this place who wants fair reviews.
Mssimo: ISO 64 should be a big deal when it comes to the numbers game (DXO-Mark) This camera might be able to hit 14.5 or 15 stops of DR. In the real world, it would be the same as the current cameras from ISO 100-6400 and about the same as canon from ISO 1600+ as far as DR.
Page 3 of the preview says "... ISO 64 is a 'true' base - it doesn't come with a penalty in reduced dynamic range." So while we may not see expanded dr, at least it won't be reduced as you suggest.
Henry M. Hertz: i have tested this lens against other 400+mm lenses... and there is simply no alternative in this price range.
no other tamron or sigma 400+ mm lens around 1000 euro can compete with the tamron 150-600mm at the long end. the closest is the EF 100-400mm from canon.
sure my 400mm f2.8 is better.. suprise suprise.but there is no other 400+mm lens for ~1000 euro that can keep up with the tamron.
the EF 100-400mm canon is worse at 400mm than the tamron.the tamron is at 450-500mm as good as my EF 100-400 copy was at 400mm.my tamron is really really sharp at 200-300mm.that´s why i sold my EF 100-400mm and kept the tamron.
i see this lens as direct competition to canons EF 100-400mm and it´s a great competition!!
for testchart shoots visit www.the-digital-picture.com.compare the tamron to the canon EF 100-400mm.
the EF 100-400mm and especially the EF 300mm f4 from canon show WAY MORE CA´s then the tamron.so i can not agree to the findings of this test concerning CA´s.
I agree with Dr_Jon. The Canon 400 f/5.6 is a real alternative for it's intended purpose. I don't see how it can be so easily dismissed. It is lacking IS and zoom, but those things aren't really necessary to every shooter. It's 700g lighter than the Tamron so it's easier to hand-hold for long periods of time. And doesn't absolutely demand a tripod for wildlife or sports.
It's surely much faster to achieve focus which is important to many, or even most considering such a lens unless one is shooting still or slow moving subjects. In that case I'd also consider an old mf super tele Nikkor.
According to the youtube review by Tony Northrup, http://youtu.be/1fmMG5jgDwk, the Canon 400 is significantly sharper as well. Enough, in fact that simply cropping to a 600mm equivalent will still produce the better result. It isn't even required to use a teleconverter.
The Tamron is surely a fine lens and a significant achievement, but saying it's not a viable alternative may be true for you, but some may find it the better option for a similar cost. Each person will need to weigh the importance of the trade-offs of each lens to determine what's best for them.
Kim Letkeman: Tamron makes some of the best optics in the business and their zooms rarely disappoint. But 300mm EFL and no stabilization? That's about the most short-sighted decision I've ever seen and they automatically cut their target market in half. For me, this zoom hit the "never in a million years" category instantly.
So when people inevitably say that m4/3 is not big enough to attract the 3rd party manufacturers, we need to point out that Tamron at least have been idiots about it. Sigma's primes are brilliant, but Tamron has done the exact opposite in making their design choices.
I held out great hope for Tamron in the fast zoom category ... I always loved their 17-50 and 28-75 lenses and shot both regularly on my Nikons. So I consider this a tragic loss for m4/3 as Tamron's weak sales will not justify any more zooms at all.
Daniel, it seems that the 75 f/1.8 pretty is much a Sigma Art series lens.
digiart: A major step forward in technology... Bent sensors will mean simpler, lighter and cheaper lenses!
Cheaper to manufacture, but they will still likely be as expensive for the consumer.
T3: Other sites have reported that this lens will have a plastic lens mount. I'm okay with shorter lenses having plastic lens mounts, because those lenses don't stick out as much. But I don't think it's a good idea for a long, narrow telephoto lens to have a plastic lens mount. A long, narrow cylinder sticking out from your camera needs something more re-assuring than a plastic lens mount.
It really seems like Canon is only doing the bare minimum to keep the EOS M system going. I think it's time to sell my EOS M gear.
I don't think the plastic lens mount was meant to be related to Canon's lack of commitment to the M, at least I didn't read it that way. Surely having a total of four lenses now in two years, half of which aren't/won't be available in the US and no bodies even listed on the official website what one would call serious. How many slr lenses and bodies has Canon released in the same time? Don't get me wrong, I own and actually rather like the M for what it is, preferring its output to the only other mirrorless camera I own, the E-M5 in spite of the tests which tell me they're more or less the same. That said, I'd love an evf, a grip and some more fast-ish primes... oh, and a nice small 1:1 macro lens.
ntography: This has been a long time coming. The best sensor and lens you have is the human eye which is curved in the horizontal and vertical planes, this is halfway there. Would require complex and accurate manufacturing processes
We just have the best processor...
Though I don't really like plactic mounts either, I don't think we have to worry too much. The lens is only 86.5mm or less than 3½" long, and weighs only 260 grams or just over 9 oz. Of course if you extend it to use as the handle of an eos m hammer, it may be a problem.
I agree that Canon is currently just doing the minimum to keep the system alive. The whole endeavour seems to have been to create a new mount for what will likely (and hopefully) turn into a very different future mirrorless system.
CameraLabTester: Canon should replace the EOS M disaster with a newer body model instead on newer lenses.
New lenses, no matter how brilliant they are, are just bricks when mounted on the quagmire designed EOS M.
Come out with an upgrade for EOS M, then maybe consumers will call on the deal.
It is also your responsibility, Canon, to issue relevant and important FIRMWARE UPDATES to those who have been suckered into buying the EOS M incomplete camera. They deserve your support.
BarnET, how do you find so much time and anger in your life to comment 32 times out of a total of only 114 posts (115 now)? :) If you are being paid as a detractor, I'd say your employer is certainly getting their money's worth. ;)
avicenanw: This video also illustrates how essential weather sealing can be if you live at, or travel to places with wet weather, high humidity and extreme temperatures. Thanks for the video Canon, now let's see your line of weather resistant DSLRs and lenses.
Would you like something in a 7d, 5d, or 1d to go with the red rings?
Orin B.: The info about how to thread your camera strap is just plain WRONG!!! If you have ever used a rock/mountain climbing harness you know that you need to go through and then thread back (double back) the tail of the strap. That is the only way to fully secure the strap from sliding out. Here is a photo to illustrate the CORRECT way to securely thread any strap through a buckle!!! Hope it helps.
Nice, but has anyone's camera ever crashed to the ground because they failed to secure it like a climbing harness? Even the heaviest slrs don't weigh all that much (in spite of the claims of many these days).
That won't hurt them too much since it's mostly covered by the 14.5 million dollars Nikon was awarded from Sigma.
Yeah, but can it fit in your jeans pocket? ;)
dpmaxwell: Canon fans seem really active around here lately. Something has them all riled up...
" Canon fans seem really active around here lately. Something has them all riled up..."
Meanwhile you've had about 10 posts out of the 2000+. Do you feel they're making the Sony fans look bad? How many posts are the Canon fans allowed?