darngooddesign: Aside from the price and lack of viewfinder, it seems like a nice enough camera.
That's up to the user to decide, but the M3 has a much better selection of lenses to choose form. Of course it is ridiculous that Canon isn't releasing more native lenses.
colonel444: Step 1. Take out the lens from X100T, and sell it as XF 23mm f/2.
Step 2. Take XF 23mm f/1.4, slap it to X100T, and sell it as X150.
The 23mm 1.4 is a big lens. You'd be sacrificing one of the best parts of the X100 series, the size.
ebbo: I guess Fuji will milk the X100 as far as they can then launch a full frame
Full frame is tiny, medium format is where its at.
dynaxx: Just one more symptom of a society that now has a dull and uneducated majority, that used to be a minority. Everything has to be dummed-down to its simplest level so they can cope and the simplest photography is found in a mobile telephone.
Too many examples in modern life but look at newspapers, TV programs, cinema that now use simple language/ideas and avoid complexity because most people can't handle it.
Understanding how photography works does not involve any difficult concepts or skills but the short attention span of the current generation rules out reading a book on the subject that was always the way of learning anything new for my generation.
While I agree in general, if that applied to photography there would have been significantly more people taking photos with film cameras.
I think the Leica T OS is the closest to smartphone useage
Papi61: While Apple is busy stealing ideas from others (seems like they just discovered the MS Surface and they're about to "invent" it...) and trying to re-patent other people's ideas by changing minutia, Samsung is about to release a 16 terabyte SSD. Vaporware vs. real breakthrough technology. Now, who's the REAL innovator?
Why would we think those things?
The M3 easily adapts to all the Canon mount APSC lenses.
ovlov: What makes this a worthwhile upgrade from the m1? What I'd really like to see from Canon is something more like Sony's a7 line.
Its a pretty obvious upgrade to the M1.
Jonathan F/2: Honestly I don't see too many mirrorless shooters out in the real world. I'm guessing most of them spend their free time on the internet preaching how DSLRs are dinosaurs and dissing anything Canon/Nikon instead of actually taking photos! Lol
They're probably not in the coffee shops you frequent. :D
Aside from the price and lack of viewfinder, it seems like a nice enough camera.
PazinBoise: I don't think Canon is being lazy rather I think Canon is still trying to figure a way to get a piece of the mirrorless pie without cannibalizing their DSLR sales. Given the price of this system it is targeted at enthusiast/hobbyists/pros who are already invested into Canon's lens system. For them all they need is a simple adapted so that they can use their existing lenses.
Canon knows that many of its ardent customers are curious about mirrorless and they also know they are losing sales to the competition in that segment. Having the EOS-M3 positioned where its at is Canon's way of saying "Look we have a mirrorless system that lets you use all of you existing lenses you don't have to buy into a whole new system!" And by pricing it they way they have it won't cut into their entry level/budget DSLR market.
Canon is hoping they will be buy-curious.
Ruy Penalva: Do we are in the XXI century? A 16 MP sensor sounds like a sub smart phone sensor. If it were only video dedicated may be but a mixed still and video sensor should have more pixels.
My point was that the A7S shows the low-light benefit of fewer pixels in relation to the other A7 models. Same for this Olympus, it will have better low light performance when compared to a 24MP m4/3 sensor.
There really should be a discount kit price with the EVF.
You can get the X-T10/18-55 kit for the same money, and its a better lens.
sapporodan: I think they will need to put their 50mp full frame sensor in it (and design new lenses) to get much interest.
It cant compete against Sony for people who pixel peep, and it cant compete against Micro four thirds for people who want small cameras with lots of lens choice.
Kind of stuck in the middle.
But it can compete for people who already have canon lenses but want something smaller.
Ruy, the other main benefit of the A7S is superb low light shooting, where fewer megapixels make it much better for that.
NetMage: New relative to its predecessor is in-body stabilization? What predecessor would that be that came without it?
Since we're getting super pedantic :D you would need to separate IBIS from in-body; otherwise it sounds like IBIS is the type of in-body stalization. *whew* being correct on tht einterent is hard work. :D
yahoo2u: If it ain't broke don't fix it.
You sound like a Leica owner. LOL
lsanto: A real 35mm F2 lens and a full frame sensor.
Nah, go for medium format. Full frame sensors are still tiny.
Sangster: The drawback of powered zooms is the speed. 2-3 seconds can be an eternity when trying to grab a spontaneous moment.
I agree. This would be wonderful with a manual zoom.
W5JCK: I don't understand the concept of making a $1300 bridge camera that is okay for taking Facebook and Instagram images but not images good enough to print. An a6000 with kit 210mm telephoto will do a much better job and cost less, and you will have printable images that are in focus. None, absolutely none, of these sample photos are good. That might be more photographer error than anything, but these tiny 1" sensors are never going to produce any real quality.
W5JCK. While it is 5.0 for depth of field, it is actually still f2.8 as far as how much light it captures.