Rob Sims: Just a word about the cheap $100 kit lens, that keeps getting bashed by photo purists. Yes, everyone knows this lens was designed with software correction in mind... it suffers from barrel distortion at the wide end, CA and also vignetting. But for the target audience shooting JPG (All corrected automatically in camera) won't see this, and those dabbling in RAW (corrected automatically in LR) will be able to work around it. More important, is that the is sharp at the center, and sharp at the edges when down even 1 or 2 stops. Doesn't seem any worse than most other kit lenses (Fuji's expensive F2.8-4.0 excluded).
All comparisons I've seen point to it being as sharp as the original 18-55... and certainly no worse than the Pana 12-35 m43 lens that keeps getting mentioned. First 3 reviews that popped up in Google:http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=3618http://camerahoarders.com/sony-e_pz_16-50mm-e-mount-lens-review/2/http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/842-sony1650f3556oss?start=2
My 18-55mm kitlens is not good in the corners at all FL to my taste. Stopped down it is a bit better but 55mm keeps being mediocre.For everyday snapshots it is fine though.
nanomatrix: Anybody know what lens DPR used on the A6000 to take the Studio Scene comparisons shots?
dxomark can give you an idea how a lens performs technically.It does not take into account the handling / bokeh and character of an lens.As you can see there are some good E-mount primes out there, Zoom lenses less so.Cheap and good primes are the 19, 30 and 60mm sigma and the 50mm OSS from sony. I do not know how fast the A6000 focus in combination with the sigma lenses since I use an older body.
lightroom exif say: FE 55mm F1.8 ZAA very sharp lens, better than the lens used for ia. the 70D. I was wondering why the images looked so sharp on the A6000 ;)
munro harrap: The high iso performance at 3200 iso is so bad the machine certainly does not merit a gold award.Manual focus and zoom are also questionably defective-slow to the point of useless for exactly the kind of quick snap stills photographers buy this sort of thing. so I guess it gets Gold as it has 4K nobody can yet see or edit properly. As we cannot see its 4K movies at their resolution we do not know if it is any improvement on the HD we can see. All that glisters....
Yes, at this price its a steal-of your money!!!
Editing 4K movies will prolly need top of the line CPU and a fast ssd
Lab D: Wow, the camera is still not for sale and it is staying at 27% on the DPR most popular cameras list. Nothing else is 10%. Next week when it becomes available, it will be interesting to see what happens
perhaps a manipulated list?
Rooru S: fifth af lens for eos-m in two years? it's hard to believe people are complaining about lack of lenses in sony e-mount (both fullframe and aps-c)
I bought the original adapter rather cheap. My EF lenses that handles well on the eos-m are the 40mm f/2.8 and my 100mm f/2 which I also use as a macro lens with a close-up lens attacked to it.With the adapter I also use 2 zeiss contax lenses I have.
beavertown: The worst investment ever made by Tameron. Who owns EOS-M?
Even the population of the unwanted Nikon 1 system is much higher than the EOS-M.
well I do. I'm interested to see how this tamron hold compared to the recently announced ef-m 55-200mm. Lens is kinda heavy for a native ef-m lens
We should always remember the sacrifices made that day. If it wasn't for the allied landings in Normandy Stalin would haven conquered the whole of Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Belgium and prolly part of France.
Josh152: Wow I can't believe they didn't put the 70D's sensor with dual pixel AF in it. It would have had the best AF in any mirrorless camera to date. Pluse a cmaera like this is begging for an EVF.
Canon is just slow in inplementing new technology in new camera's. I bet the 70D was delayed a lot as well. The M3 would prolly be the M with the dual pix tech I think.
robogobo: Well, as a moderately happy owner of the original M, I'm used to this camera's being overlooked for not keeping up with the specs wars, but allow me to explain why I love my M despite its many flaws.
1) Canon glass. Not only is the 22mm tack sharp, but with the ef adapter I can use all my L glass, which do this APS-C sensor justice.
2) Image quality. The M definitely has one of the best IQ of all the mirrorless. If that's important to you, it's reason enough to get one.
3) AF problems were overblown. It had a rough start, but the firmware update finally fixed the AF problems. It's still not the fastest, but I don't find it a problem anymore.
4) I have to repeat: Image Quality.
I got a M last week (big discounts) and my wife owns a nex F3. Had time enough to compare them. I prefer handling the M but the sensor of the nex is just better in noise / DR. The DXOmark results shows it. The quality of the Canon 22mm makes up for it. In raw I actually don't see much color differences.
binauralbeats: If this comes in at or under the $800US price of the original, people will be waiting in lines to get it! Ken Rockwell said the EOS M is the first serious mirrorless and as usual, he was right on the money. This can only be better.
Before the mid 80ies there was no autofocus at all and still people could make photos of ever-moving babies :sI got the M because it was discounted so much and I'm pleased with it for the money.
LSE: It is hard to imagine that canon still produces such hideous noise at low ISO levels in the shadow areas. This is a HUGE problem on the 5DmkIII and 1DX rendering them almost useless for landscape work as pulling detail out of shadows should not bring such high levels of noise. It wouldn't be that much of a problem if the canon sensors had decent dynamic range but they are a whole generation behind everybody else, specially Nikon which has been delivering over 2 stops beyond canon for a few years now. Because of this, one almost has to always pull detail out of shadows and thus the noise problem becoming even more severe. And why can't they just do what Nikon/sony do and deliver clean shadows at LOW ISO? I mean this is ISO100 for god's sake! why is there noise!
just another nikon fanboy
dopravopat: After a brief inspection of the nice and detailed in-depth review I feel a nice, warm feeling inside. I am very satisfied that the EOS 6D is the camera it is, now I do not regret getting new APS-C designed lenses for my Canon EOS 60D, becouse moving to an affordable state of the art FF camera from Canon is simply not optional. Where to begin? Fixed LCD, horrible moiré patterns in video (no improvement in this area whatsoever since the 5D MkII or the 60D), flash sync and fastest shutter speed worse than on my 60D (I use 1/8000 more often thatn I thought I will), price...
Again, thank you Canon. I can grab my 60D tomorrow and enjoy shotting with it (and with the Sigma 8-16, 17-50 and 50-150), with no questions in the back of my head about what has improved since I got the 60D. Becouse the answer is realy - nothing important for me. I do not care about the number of AF points or framerate, around 5 fps is still enough for me.
Now I am really interested in the new Sigma 30 mm f1.4 EX DC.
Good on you you feel confident your 60D was the perfect purchase.Have fun makeing more pics of yr dog in the snow.Like a few hunderd replies here it adds nothing to the discussion about the 6D. A lot never used a FF camera at all.
Michael: So, it's priced like Canon Macro L IS? whats the point?
Who is going to buy a Sigma when the canon 100mm L is as expensive? I think no one. My sigma experiences so far were not good anyways. All lenses had some kind of decentering or focussing issues.