Joseph: No AF-S 24mm f1.8 yet. The 300mm does sound interesting though. Will wait for review(s) to come out first.
What about the Tokina 11-16mm? It's a UWA, and it's served me really well the past couple years.
acjohnson55: Nikon's in a weird position of having to keep pressing on with a bizarrely inferior CX format that maintains no connection to their pro line, or playing catch-up with Canon, who are looking like by far the most innovative of the two giants. It's really tough to imagine them doing both. Canon's clearly more open to disrupting its own high-end consumer product lines (the G1 X and the APS-C DSLRs). I'm having trouble finding a bright side, can anybody tell me what the 1 Series really has going for it, now or in the future?
gsum: I'm clearly not talking about high end DSLR's. I own a Nikon DSLR, and I'm pretty sure they've got the edge in that market. I'm talking about what they've got going on at the lower end. They've really put themselves in a box when it comes to comparisons with the other formats because it seems (to me) like they have chosen to cripple themselves with a small sensor, and therefore relegate themselves to the lower end of the market.
Photo Pete: So the biggest argument for the 1-series I've heard so far is AF speed. Fair enough. Anything else?
Nikon's in a weird position of having to keep pressing on with a bizarrely inferior CX format that maintains no connection to their pro line, or playing catch-up with Canon, who are looking like by far the most innovative of the two giants. It's really tough to imagine them doing both. Canon's clearly more open to disrupting its own high-end consumer product lines (the G1 X and the APS-C DSLRs). I'm having trouble finding a bright side, can anybody tell me what the 1 Series really has going for it, now or in the future?
Jylppy: What a great opening from Canon! I would say. As with any MILC, one will buy not jus a camera, but into a SYSTEM - including lenses, accessories, future upgrade options. On strategic level Canon played smart here:1) APS-C sensor gives them upper hand over 4/3rds in image quality - always.2) APS-C sensor and the EF-M mount gives compatibility of huge Canon lens portfolio. There are many Canon DSLR owners out there, and while using EF/EF-S lenses in EF-M is not optimal in sizewise, it is possible.3) compatibility with huge selection of Canon DSLR accessories
The first product is really nice also:4) Fantastic, clean design, without gimmickry. Yes, I think the retro look of Olympus E-M5 is nice, but Canon's clean design language will appeal to broader audience. I and my wife love it.5) Touch-screen for ease for ease of use - let's see how photography enthusiastics like it.
Lack of EVF is a gap, but there is nothing preventing Canon to implement it in its next prosumer model.
It's certainly not necessary for everyone, but to say there's no reason to have an EVF is obviously false given how many people are interested in having one
EdLu: Very interesting offering from Canon.
Mirrorless models offer reduced weight, and that is a big benefit. But I found it a bit tricky to figure out what the weight actually is for my preferred configuration. That made it hard to do useful comparisons. The problem is sometimes the weight is without the battery or without the lens or with the wrong lens. So here is what I found on the weight of the EOS-M.
With battery and with the 18-55mm lens, the weight is 506 to 508 grams. This compares to 775 grams for the Canon T4i/650D, similarly equipped. So the mirrorless model has a weight advantage of 268g. That is significant, but far from half the weight of the DSLR. The two cameras will probably produce pics with similar IQ. But note that the DSLR has a viewfinder and flash, which the M does not.
The new offerings from the different manufacturers are fantastic. But I think it is important to gather all the facts you need to make the best buying decisions.
Good points, but imagine what your bag weighs with a small set of EF-M lenses compared to EF or EF-S
falconeyes: I looked at the mounts and compared their size, in particular their inner rings.
Assuming the EOS-M mount is meant for APS-C (and it sure looks like this), then by comparison, the NEX mount is for an APS-H and the Nikon-1 mount is for a FourThirds sensor.
However, next to a K-01 (which has a mount known to support full frame) the NEX mount appears to support the same size. So, it may actually be made for full frame even.
I wonder why Canon made the inner ring this big (without saving space by also reducing the metal mount). It's a bit the same with the Nikon 1, it could support APS-C with a smaller inner ring. For Nikon, I guess it is because they're still going to release their DX mirrorless with a separate mount. But for Canon, I don't see the reason.
Do you think Nikon is really going to do DX mirrorless? Not saying they won't, but it's hard to imagine them doing that AND continuing the CX mount of the 1 series
Fredy Ross: Canon does not read the news about the smartphone taking over the world. No viewfinder and no articulating screen is a killer as far as I am concerned. Maybe the next model will suit all my good canon lenses. In the meantime I will stick with my 600D and my sony nex 5n. Sold my 7D as it was too heavy. I miss the viewfinder and speed of it but my neck thanks me.
People are going to eventually wake up and realize that smartphone pictures blow. I really believe this.
Obviously, the smartphone is going to suffice for many (if not most), but I don't think the compact camera is going anywhere anytime soon. The fundamental limitations of what you can do with a smartphone sensor make it unsuited for so many of the things you can do even with a subcompact. But here's the way I look at it--no one wants to take a big vacation and be left with nothing but crappy smartphone photos.
tonytonytony: Usually, I only read your posts here. On the account of Canon's debut into mirror-less, I thought I'd join in on the brouhaha.
Canon is smart. Canon is testing the market on their terms, design and all. I imagine that both the advancements in EVF technology and Sensor technology will alter the course of this model. It may even become a vanguard for their product-line: Compact, EVF, DSLR.
In the next five-years, I want this camera to be THE travel-camera. I imagine Fuji to hold the highest competition --looks and other things. (I am a digital Fuji-patron, despite only having a GW690II.) Yet if this Canon is endowed with an EVF in future models, along with improved sensor capabilities (given Canon's impressive algorithms), tack on a silk-nightie and she can go with me anywhere.
c_henry: You're right that they've had plenty of time to observe the market, but as of right now, I would bet you that the mirrorless market is still a tiny fraction of the overall market. So even though they're a bit behind the curve, years from now, no one will remember how late they were or what the EOS-M was. Remember, Kodak had the first commercially available DSLR--they're hardly leading the market now.
acjohnson55: I think it's pretty clear that this is only Canon's first foray into mirrorless, and that they've targeted this toward the bottom end of the poweruser market. Not to knock this camera, because it looks really nice, but with any fewer features, it would appear a bit deficient. And with only the two lenses available, it seems positioned to be just behind the G1 X.
I fully expect to see a more premium model out within a year or so with features (like an extra control dial, EVF, swivel screen, pop-up flash, etc.) that clearly establish it as the superior to the G1 X and stack up nicely to Sony's NEX-7. This is just a taste of what's to come, so I think it's a bit erroneous to look at this as Canon's final word on MILC.
Also, for all the critics out there, I think people are discounting the amount of pull the Canon brand, sexy form factor, and EF compatibility will have at the point-of-sale. Additionally, the price is obviously going to come down a couple hundred bucks over time.
I might also add that it is at least comforting that all 7 of the Amazon reviewers for the NX200 think it's a great camera.
I just wish this had come out earlier. I've been a devoted Canon P&S user, but I chose to go to Nikon for my first DSLR. I love my D5100 and the glass I've got for it so far, but the idea that had I bought a T3i, I could have eventually upgraded my G10 to something like this, maintaining some amount of compatibility, would have been pretty compelling. I probably wouldn't buy this EOS-M, but it's pretty easy for me to visualize this thing's descendents being pretty badass cameras.
I wonder how devoted Nikon is to CX....I can't really see them launching a separate DX compatible MILC mount while maintaining CX.
I totally agree. There are a lot of short-sighted people on this forum who seem to think this is the last word on Canon MILC. Right now, they've put themselves in a great spot to feel out the market. If MILC really catches on, we might see EF-M really replace the bottom end of the EOS lineup. Or it might replace the G series. This is just the vanguard, and there are a lot of directions they might go with this.
disraeli demon: Canon were never going to do anything radical on their first outing into mirrorless - they've got far too much invested in SLR sales to risk frightening the horses. What's interesting is how much more leeway they've left themselves compared to Nikon - using an APS-C sensor leaves them room to make much more capable models in the future. There's no reason why there couldn't be an EOS-M equivalent of the Sony Nex 7 if the market shifts towards mirrorless and they don't feel the need to protect the original Eos line so much. Given the performance of the Eos 7D (and what Fuji has been able to do with the APS-C sensor in the X-Pro 1) the fact that the Eos M mount can't support full-frame doesn't mean we won't eventually see some high-performing enthusiast/pro Eos M bodies.
But I'm convinced Canon will move very cautiously, at least for the next few years.
Dougbm_2: Because they couldn't have had EF/EF-S compatibility ahd they done that. Sony's proven that an APS-C can work with mirrorless. And now, they're always going to be able to lord sensor size and compatibility over their real competitors: Nikon.
Jokica: I guess we will see new forum on this site, where users (other then NEX) will scream for more native lenses!
Jeez, the format JUST launched. Maybe give them a year to develop more lenses? Nikon's CX system only has four so far, and isn't even compatible with their other gear.
Jokica: Now Canon have joined Sony, Fuji and Samsung in APS-C league, how will Nikon respond? Stay with 1" sensor, or design new APS-C mirrorless line?
I think Nikon made a huge mistake with the CX format, and I thought so months ago. Canon chose a larger sensor that provides continuity with the rest of their pro line. For people who make most of their decisions between the big two brands, I think Canon is much better positioned for the future.
@Vitruvius According to Amazon, the NX200 lists for....guess how much...
You've gotta take these initial MSRPs with a grain of salt.
Olivier in Belgium: Strange analysis from dpr on some points.
"So don't expect a future full frame EF-M mount camera - it's not going to happen."Of course not. EF-M lenses don't cover full frame image area. Still, this says nothing about Canon developing or not-developing a full frame mirrorless camera.
"As you can see, eliminating the reflex mirror and optical viewfinder has enabled a dramatic reduction in size." The "dramatic reduction" in size is most probably also related to the lack of grip, flash, external controls, probably weaker battery...
By the way, I fail to understand why so many mirrorless camera have no built-in flash. Part of their interest lies in convenience. Needing an external flash is all but convenient.
For your first point, that's exactly what the review was saying. They didn't say anything about Canon not developing a FF, just that it wasn't possible for EF-M.
For your second point, there's not much point in reducing the size of the auxiliary parts of your camera if your mirror, prism, and lenses already are taking up so much space. As long is it's gonna be big already, might as well add some functionality to the brick. With those gone, a lot of the other space-taking parts become superfluous. That's why there are no DSLRs without all the things you mentioned.
craigrc: More importantly, the lens adapter is $200! WTF?
Sounds like they're trying to extort their power users.
It's not a high-volume item, yet it takes a decent bit of engineering to produce. It will come down in price over time.
WT21: Is this the first Canon WITHOUT a direct print button??
Will it be missed by anyone?
mikewhalen5: Without a viewfinder, my interest level is zero.
I think people are being a bit hysterical about the lack of EVF. Before I finally went SLR, I took thousands of great photos with my G10, almost never using its optical viewfinder, and often in bright conditions.
I think it's pretty clear that this is only Canon's first foray into mirrorless, and that they've targeted this toward the bottom end of the poweruser market. Not to knock this camera, because it looks really nice, but with any fewer features, it would appear a bit deficient. And with only the two lenses available, it seems positioned to be just behind the G1 X.