OK, sure. But does it make phone calls? No.
win39: I wonder whether Lens Rentals has ever tested a single lens 10 times and gotten variation?
That's a really good point....
Would it be possible to post the CR2 file of this? I'd love to play around with it in DPP....
Renato60: Excuse me, gents ... I recommend trying the 5DSR. It is manufactured for the Canon system, as a part of the system. The evaluation of the sensor alone it is relevant but I think that all the characteristics should be considered together.
I am a photographer (not an engineer). I owe the Sony a7r and the Canon 5DSR and the outputs are different. The 5DSR sensor works exceptionally well with the last lenses (100 - 400, 16 - 35, 24 - 70, ...). Files are very manageable. Native colors have been improved from the 5DIII. I am very happy with it.
I guess we should avoid to compare Ferrari and Lamborghini only because one model is a little bit faster or less noisy, ... or focusing only on a part the engine.
I second the "system" observation. I stopped using Adobe Raw because their math makes CR2 files look relatively flat and "posterized" compared to DPP. DPP brings out a three-dimentionallity that I CANNOT get with ACR. The difference is breath-taking - no kidding.
And this Tulips photo is beautiful, for sure, but its a rescue from the dust-bin - too dark, too contrasty... Micro-analize an image where all conditions are optimized for technical quality.
After the initial shock of the subscription idea I have come to have happy thoughts for Adobe again. I depend on a solid software for my livelihood, and I don't mind paying a fair price for it. And I don't mind Adobe making some money for their efforts. Affinity looks really good, though, and I'm glad to see somebody enter the fray to keep Adobe on their toes. I do worry a little bit that Affinity is hoping to win Adobe by undercutting them, and that that will end up flooding the market with copies of a cheap software. Then they'll decide it's not sustainable and raise their prices finally or go out of business and leave their converts hanging. I shouldn't worry so much.
kona_moon: The only reason I have not jumped onto the a7 bandwagon is the lack of COMPACT lenses. What good is a compact FF camera body without equally compact lenses? I will continue with my RX1 until the whole system becomes COMPACT.
I agree. The no-mirror thing ought to make really small wide-angle lenses possible. Seems like. I wonder if the light-hitting-the-pixils angle is a wrench in that theory, though... I'm really hoping somebody is working on new compact TSE lenses to go with a mirrorless body...
I would love to see a Canon full-frame mirrorless in a body similar to the Sony 7. WITH compact distortion-free TSE lenses to go with. And 50 MP. Call it a 3D.
Why Canon? Their lenses and RAW converter are wonderful and they understand how professionals make photos. It's not about the coolest new features, it's about predictable dependable usability. It's a tool. Canon gets that. So does Nikon, I think - but I'm not so familiar with their stuff anymore. So don't get excited.
Horshack: I wish the new dehazing tool could be used for reading Adobe's CC press releases.
Nyk nyk nyk
Any word about Canon updating DPP to work with the the new 5D's? DPP is so much better with CR2's than Adobe...
dpfan32: It still like iPhoto wants to import your photos in a different library to double the photos space on your hard drive! Ridiculous in the times of very small sized SSDs in recent MacBooks :-(It behaves like an external app instead of leaving the photos where I put them in folders and know where they are.
And 2.nd: it's all about selling expensive cloud storage for beaming your photos on all devices possible ... No thanx!! I'm using Picasa which takes my folders and displays them as created by myself.
To Gesture, I second the Bridge mention. It really works well and stays out of the way when I want it to. Full easy access to Meta data, excellent filters, renaming, all that. I much prefer the DPP raw converter to Adobe's... But of course Bridge doesn't talk to my phone...
AD in KC: Really disappointed. Not going to use it.
I agree with others who have complained of losing control over files. That's a deal breaker. I'm not going to dump my precious images into oblivion.
I wish they had made it more like iTunes where all your songs are organized in folders you can see in Finder. And like iTunes, I wish you could sync a smaller copy of your photos to other devices, so your big full-res files remain untouched and stored where you want them.
I appreciate that it's a free program, but I'm not happy that this is Apple's one and only solution to being able to access my photos on both desktop and phone. Yeah I can buy an organizing app (Adobe Bridge) that gives me full access to my images, but it won't make my dumb iPhone snapshots sync with my macPro.
And it smells a lot like "world domination" was more important than usability. Can't use Photoshop or Capture One or Blurb..
I will definitely check it out - thanks, Goob!
Really disappointed. Not going to use it.
If anyone here is looking for an M original, I'm selling mine here: http://kansascity.craigslist.org/pho/4937983119.html
I love the little bugger but can't justify keeping a camera that doesn't earn its keep - like my 5Ds do. That's "s" as in plural, not the new high res camera.
I bough the M to travel with, but I need to forego such a luxury and drag a bigger one around...
jonmcguffinphoto: It never ceases to amaze me the ignorance of modern day digital photographers and their insistence that not using photoshop somehow makes them a "pure" photographer as this is simply a misguided assumption.
All digital files are processed! You are either doing it yourself with tools such as Lightroom, Photoshop, or others or you are allowing the Engineers at Canon/Nikon to be your post processor by running your image through their jpg processing engine and spitting out what "it" thinks is the best way to present the image.
To imply that there is anything truly "straight out of camera" is really absurd and does nothing but show their ignorance of the photographic process in a digital world.
Agreed. It's as though nothing worthwhile is done except under wretched conditions - you wisely use the tools available to you and you're a hack. His photos are gorgeous, whether they were taken with a camera that was hand-made from buffalo hide or whatever.
And to disagree with his "bold statement" isn't being a hater. Why's the guy make such a point of "No PS" if he isn't prepared to accept some push-back? Sounds like arrogance to me. He draws the "purity" line at PS, others draw it at digital - only film is "pure". Big deal. The moment you capture a real-world scene in two dimensions you've altered it, haven't you?
AD in KC: Ten photos OF the lens, not one BY the lens? This site should be called "Digital CAMERA Review".
OK fine. My appologies.
AD in KC: All the whining over "only four lenses"! This is a compact travel camera. Its lenses are perfect for the purpose. If you want a giant collection of lenses to fill a camera bag with, there are better options! I'm a professional photographer and I use THREE lenses. I could probably use a couple more, but point is: are you collecting cameras or are you taking photos?
dwill23: MISSED THE MARK ON THIS STORY
This author is not in the board rooms, does not know the strategy behind Canon's decision to not come out with the same lenses it already has in a smaller version to mount on the EOSM. Sure, the mount did take some of the portability away, but it allowed me to save $5000 by using what I already had.
He states the adapter is hard to find? Two are available on BH $60, & $100. Both in stock. Use the internet before you write these 'stories'.
I agree with so many other people that Canon knows the US market can afford both a large SLR and small mirrorless, so why make a mirrorless as good as an SLR? Thus no EOS M in US.
Yes, it sucks, but it makes perfect sense. This article was a waste of time to read.
The failure of the EOS M (v1) was due to THIS SITE killing it before it hit shelves with stories like this. The AF was shockingly slow, but would almost always focus perfectly accurately.
Give it a chance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BTW, the 22mm is awesome.
Agreed - though I'm skeptical this site has the power to blow a camera off the map...
All the whining over "only four lenses"! This is a compact travel camera. Its lenses are perfect for the purpose. If you want a giant collection of lenses to fill a camera bag with, there are better options! I'm a professional photographer and I use THREE lenses. I could probably use a couple more, but point is: are you collecting cameras or are you taking photos?