The 6 fps sequential mode - does it fix focus and exposure, or AF and AE works, just not tracking?
DPR, you have an error in the article:"Panasonic GF5 specification highlights
16 MP Live MOS sensor ISO 160-12,800"
It should be G5, not GF5.
Photographer_C: I'm waiting for a professional mirrorless camera from Canon, Nikon or Sony even if it will use an existing lens mount ( the way Canon used EF mount for Canon EOS Cinema cameras ) or a new mount.
There is exactly one mirrorless camera which can be used in "professional" context (where "non-professional" cameras cannot) - and only barely, with some extra equipment. If your work requires weather sealing, viewfinder, long battery life (or ability to shoot on one battery while another is dead), good image quality (even without flash), high sequential shooting speed, choice of accessories - you can use Olympus E-M5+battery holder+Panasonic 12-35/2.8. But the total cost is going to be $2600 (in the US). Thanks to the overpriced Panasonic 12-35, it is not even economical, just lighter. Sony A77+16-50/2.8 can be had for $2000, without a battery holder though.
Jerry-astro: Waited anxiously for this introduction and frankly am very disappointed. The lenses and the majority of the feature set look good, but the lack of an EVF? Massive FAIL IMHO. We just sold a Sony NEX-5 that we had as a second camera because the LCD was simply impossible to use for reasonable composition on a bright, sunny day. In all other respects, the camera worked quite well. Our hope was to replace it with the EOS-M system. While the system may over time evolve with models that support EVF, frankly, it's not worth the wait. Nice try, Canon, but not good enough.
LASIK is not expensive these days.
estankov: Im sure this is a nice camera. They are all good nowadays HOWEVERenough is enough with the cute little design where you have to pinch your camera with 2 fingers and risk losing it in any situation other than a dinner at the table situation. Seriously do the engineers test those things out on a boat, on a bike, on the street, one hand only, getting it in and out of a pocket, a bag ? I don't think they do.. they just re-hash and re-hash the same old 'design' I can design a 100 times better camera with better controls layout and ergonomics. Seriously, all Im gonna do is put a ISO dial and a usable grip..who cares if it fits in a girl purse so thanks but no thanks, you want $800 - make a camera that's usable and sturdyToo little, too late, too generic.
"who cares if it fits in a girl purse"
The girl and the company which would not be able to make a sale? There are plenty of cameras which don't fit.
peevee1: EOS M with the adapter seems like a good backup camera for a professional with 7D, not taking too much space and weight (although I don't know how much the adapter weighs). But as an only system in your home, there are much, MUCH better choices from Olympus, Panasonic, Sony and Samsung.
650D - if you want big and heavy. But then D5100 or K-30 are better and cheaper.
Edmond Leung: This is the camera what we need ! Simple, small, light weight and able to use the whole range of Canon lenses.An excellent choice for business travel.I will take this one instead of NEX or other cameras with smaller sensor.
What is the point of small and light camera which takes big and heavy EF-S lenses? Try to hang it around your neck, almost any EF-S lens will pull it nose-down (not to mention that the total size&weight of the camera+adapter+lens will not be much smaller than a rebel with the same lens).Pro FF DSLRs+EF/FX lenses are balanced. APS-C DSLRs+EF-S lenses are balanced. m43 mirrorless are balanced. Mirrorless APS-C are not.
topstuff: All the months, years of waiting.
All of the benefit of not being first, and being able to watch and learn as your competitors go to market before you do.
And then, after all this, the end result is utterly boring and utterly predictable.
There is no innovation here.
Very disappointing. Canon have become very, very conservative and in the long term I think this will hurt them.
"The touchscreen, however, is an innovation "
No it is not. Panasonic and Olympus cameras had it for years.
Eleson: So, if you had $800 (as the EOS-M + 22mm lens) , what camera would you buy...?
If you cannot spend more than $800, you will always stay with the 22 lens on. What is the point of an ILC?Sony RX100 is much, much more useful for a $150 less then.
qwertyasdf: EOS-M (298) + 18-55 kit (120) = 418g650D (575) + 18-55 kit (200) = 775g
418 / 775 = 53.9%
Weight savings are nice for kit lens users.
The 18-55/3.5-5.6 is 29-88mm/5.6-9 FF eq. 418g with protruding lens. 4 fps. $1000 or so.
Sony RX100 1.8-4.9, is 28-100mm/5-13 FF eq. 240g almost flat. 10 fps. $650.
Why would anybody even think to buy the EOS-M for the 18-55 use?
Valentinian: The sensor is great (at least in principle - let's wait for the review), the 22mm lens seems also very good; too bad Canon didn't make a camera to compete with the E-M5, GH3...(are they afraid it would compete with their own DSLR ?)
5N? It is more like Oly E-PM1 or Pana GF5.
Nikonworks: Canon blew it with no articulating lcd.
They could have grabbed a large part of the market.
Also the 22 mm kit lens is not for newbies.
They will not be satisfied with 33 mm equiv fixed outlook on things.
This prime will make enthusiasts happy but the body it is attached to is quite simple ( as Canon puts in their press release ).
Kudos to Canon for serving photographer's needs with the APS-C sensor size , not worrying about cutting into DSLR sales as Nikon did with the V1.
I won't buy it but it is good news for all of us photographers.
It is actually heavier than NEX-C3.
EOS M with the adapter seems like a good backup camera for a professional with 7D, not taking too much space and weight (although I don't know how much the adapter weighs). But as an only system in your home, there are much, MUCH better choices from Olympus, Panasonic, Sony and Samsung.
Koulang: 12MP hardly satisfies the users. I would be excellent if it features 16PM like its younger brother FZ60. 12PM was good if it came out 3 years ago, but now it is the lowest.
Even adjusting for the resolution loss of Bayer-filtered sensor, 1Mpx or even 0.5Mpx on a sensor this size is maximum which can provide any benefit.Please realize that at 12mpix the distance between two adjusting sensors is already less than 2 wavelengths of red light. It is ridiculous.
The lens does not have the resolution for 12Mpix, let alone 16Mpix. Let's see, even if it is good (which I doubt, there are no such things as good superzooms) it's MTF80 is about 50lp/mm (or, in less technical terms, 100 ideal black-and-white lines per mm which are "only" 80% blurred together, details in less contrasty real world disappear much earlier). On the 6.08 x 4.56 mm sensor in this thing it gives 608x456 pixels (with the adjusting ones 80% blurred together), or 0.27 Mpix. As you can see, lens quality war is long overdue, and these kinds of megapixels on tiny sensors are just pure marketing ploy.
peevee1: The second not-_totally_-junk bridge after X-S1. Still junk, just not _totally_. :)
Strange thing that the weight is listed at 588g, just as FZ60. Must be an error, the lens in FZ200 should be significantly heavier.
It is easy to know even from specs alone. For example, on FZ60 (not a worst bridge camera, and brand new) maximum aperture goes to f/5.2 at the long end over 1/2.33" (27 mm2) sensor. The FF sensor is 840 mm2, or 31 times (about 5 stops) bigger. I.e. the equivalent aperture is f/29, or WAY beyond diffraction limit. You just cannot fool physics, the pictures WILL be blurred even at bright light (not to mention that at anything below sunlight amount of light reaching the tiny sensor at f/5.2 will be so low it will be mostly noise and noise-reduction artifacts).Another thing, if you ever seen MTF graphs, you know how hard it is to make a good zoom, even 3x, working well at all apertures (esp. wide open) and at all focal lengths. 24x-36x in a cheap camera? Please. And the smallest possible sensor.About the cost - E-PM1+14-42+40-150 (28-300eq) is cheaper (when bought together), lighter in the hands and way better. Not to mention E-PL1 ($190 with 14-42 refurb, +$100-$200 for 40-150).
kodachromeguy: Does anyone use "scene modes?" "Sweet Child's Face" - seriously? I would think the level of photographer using a G5 would not be interested. For that matter, I cannot recall seeing point-and-shoot users selecting the modes, either; most of them just point and shoot.
No, they are actually convenient sometimes as a shortcut for a lot of settings in time-constrained situations.
peevee1: "The Extra Tele Conversion function extends zoom range Max 4.8x without deterioration of image quality."
Either their video is very bad at the normal mode, or it is just false advertisement. You understand, for 4.8x digital teleconversion you need to use 1/23 part of the sensor. In could not possibly be as good as video from the whole sensor unless it is a complete junk to begin with. Starting with 4/3, it is like 1/4" sensor, it is not that small even in tiny cheap consumer camcorders.
And without IBIS, you still can use only a handful on Pana zooms for video, or have to shoot from a tripod, if you want something better than a shaky-blurry. The same for stills in low light.
The 16:9 ratio from that sensor is about 13-14 mpixels to begin with. 4.8x teleconversion uses 1/23 part of the sensor, so it could not use more than about 0.7 mpixels. It is pretty terrible to make 2mpix video from 0.7 mpixels, but even at if at normal mode they use only 2 mpixels of the sensor instead of full 14, they lose A LOT of light to begin with. Almost 4 stops of light. In terms of quality, it is like shooting at ISO 25600 instead of 1600 - i.e. lots noise and color blotching everywhere instead of a clean image.
His memory card performance database was (and I think still is) the best out there.
One good thing about RX100 that it's surface is smooth and rounded, no hot shoe, all lugs and buttons and dials are recessed, nothing except the reasonably-sized lens barrel in the middle to catch in your pockets. Seems like this grip might add one more point which can make it not so easy to slip in a tight pocket.The camera is very light and the shutter release is on top, I don't think a user is supposed to grip it as a DSLR, it should rest on top of a ring finger (or even a pinky if you have a small hand), with middle finger just giving it balance.