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?
Ten photos OF the lens, not one BY the lens? This site should be called "Digital CAMERA Review".
AD in KC: OK I really don't get this. It's a camera that sticks to your phone? So your phone is what then, the viewing screen and controls?
Ah. So they've solved that "usefulness" problem. Good idea.
OK I really don't get this. It's a camera that sticks to your phone? So your phone is what then, the viewing screen and controls?
AbrasiveReducer: The problem is not cell phones. The problem is that cameras are already good enough. For every guy with a D800, a 14-24 and a tripod, there are 1000 who are happy with what they have, or not willing to spend what it would take to get something significantly better.
Very few people have a genuine need for a specific level of image quality. Want? Sure. Need? No. The notion that a camera or sensor is stale or out of fashion does not work when the results people get from what they already own fulfill their expectations.
Yep. Cameras today are damned good. Sell more copiers and let the phones have the compact market.
W5JCK: As long as Canon continues to sit on its corporate backside and turn out lackluster improvements that are merely minor updates to cameras long ago released, they will continue to slide. They need to innovate and push the envelope. Minor tweaks to outdated designs just won't cut it in today's market. That is why so many of us have jumped off the Canon wagon in search of better equipment.
I don't mind that they're not "pushing the envelope". What Canon excels at is rock-solid dependable equipment. I rely on my cameras for my livelihood - they're tools. Last thing I need is someone pulling the rug out from under the system few months just to try and snag some rich, retired guy's hobby money.
And no-one can touch their 24mm TSE lens. Nobody's tried to.
OUTRAGEOUS! How dare they make improvements to their camera and then offer it up to people who want to buy it!
OK, I've been watching tutorials on-line all morning and playing with the new DPP - this is really wonderful. I haven't used it for years because the UI was so non-intuitive and clumsy - I don't know if that's only just a recent improvement or not... But the results are MUCH better than what I've been getting from Adobe Raw - tone gradations are much more natural looking, more realistic and three dimensional. ACR has alway had a sort of posterizing effect, but I've put up with it because the controls are second to none - of raw converters I've used, anyway - and I just couldn't figure out how to get similar results from DPP.
One request if Canon is reading this: give us a filter window like Adobe Bridge has that lets you filter images by aperture and by ISO. This is important for architectural work so the f8, slow exposures can be separated from the higher speed people-blur exposures...
Very happy camper.
I worship everything Sony and loath EVERYTHING else! Or wait. I meant Canon! Or. Just a minute......
justmeMN: "To the peanut gallery, the so-called experts..."
This ad is clearly targeting DPR users. :-)
"Photo enthusiasts" can't be pleased. They're outraged at EVERY imperfection. They want 4x5 quality from their phones.
fastlass: I'm probably speaking for most of us when I say that Nikon seems to have poisoned 200 years of photography with this move.
Fastlass, honey - you need to sit down and breath through your nose...