igor_s: For me, small size is not an advantage, as long as this is not a pocketable compact. Even for my medium-sized man hands, I would prefer rather 5D over 700D (price aside:). A second camera for a miniature woman-pro? Non-pros, I guess, would prefer a mirrorless system or a compact.
I think that Canon do not expect high sales, but the cost of redesign is very small, and they simply want to sell a little more old chips. Just the same as with 700D.
I don't see why a person using an SLR looks like an idiot. Conspicuous, maybe, but an idiot???
frodo911: After EOS M just further proof that Canon has totally missed the train... they don't realize that in order to compete in the small scale csc market they need to concentrate first and foremost on new lens designs. Small body cameras that force the cutomer to use large body lenses make no sense at all!
I agree re. big lenses on small bodies. However, Canon did produce the 40mm pancake a little while ago. A couple more such lenses and they'll be in the game. A 100D with 22m and 40mm pancakes sounds interesting.
Juck - that remark is not acceptable, it's an insult.
Dougbm_2: Very small. Looks ridiculous with anything but a pancake lens. Pretty uninspiring to look at.
I totally fail to see why the looks are relevant. It's a clean and neat design and it's tool for taking pictures. That's it. It is not a sculture to put on display or anything.
luele: Yes, you are right. Leica has mirror less cameras from the beginning in the 1020's till now.
But the difference is that they have a viewfinder not only a screen. I don't like cameras without viewfinder because they are more unstable to me. So Canon please make a model with a electronic viewfinder like nikon or Sony.
I'd like to see another model with a viewfinder as well. However, I find EVFs poor and would like to see something like the Fuji hybrid viewfinder.
m68rk: OH GREAT..... just what i have been waiting for, something small, compact with a decent sized sensor that i can use with my existing EF lens collection, small enough for street photography, a lot less obvious than a 5D.
BUT why no view finder i don't want to stand there with the other mobile phone users.
Pehaps cannon have completely missed the boat and forgot to add direct dialing and incoming calls as a feature.
I know what you mean, but maybe there will be more EOS M models in future?
gray cat: Remember folks, all your optical viewfinders from the "good ole daze" will fit right on the top in the hot shoe. Been working for decades that way, and being able to use my Canon DSLR lenses is really cool. Mic input and level screen, auto focus during video will be very nice too! I'm in.
Except that not everyone wants to have the flash installed all the time, nor use it very much. On-camera flash is a killer.Canon themselves suggest that the high-ISO performance means the flash isn't required for many situations where it migh have been used previously.
tjbates: It's funny to me that one of the main critisisms of Canon was that they didn't have auto focus lenses optimized for video. The thing is that anyone who has a clue about focussing for video with a DSLR doesn't use auto focus even if it is available.Now we have a lens that apparently can't easily be manually focussed. OOoopps.Which market is this for?
It can be manually focussed fairly easily. The focussing ring is quite thin, but it works well enough.
derfla1949: To me this lens smells very strongly like a precursor to a soon to be announced mirrorless system.m43 is going to have serious competition.This is good news.
Absolutely. I have one for use on my 5D and it works very well with this camera. On an APS-C body it would be equiv. of a short telephoto and not as much use, to my mind. It wouldn't work on a small mirrorless as the lens register distance would be too much and spoil the benefits of the mirror-less design (see Pentax K-01).
I will undoubtedly get one of these lenses.
However, I am a bit disappointed to see that it will cost $200 in the USA, but the equivalent of over $300 in Europe where I live.
Stephen_C: 40 mm? On an APS-C that yields the ever-popular 64 mm focal length. A full frame camera will still be big with a pancake. Who exactly is the target audience for this lens?
No, not at all. A full frame camera is not 'big'. It is bigger than an APS body but still not 'big'. The main impediment to carrying an SLR around alot is the huge lens sticking out of the front. Assuming good quality I will certainly have one for my 5D.
sir_bazz: Can help but chuckle when reading the majority of comments below.Just confirms that the average Canon user cares nothing about form or functionality.
They'd probably love the 40mm unanimously if Canon painted it white, added a red ring and sold it for upwards of $1K
Maybe you can explain what you are getting at?
billhuegerich: It's nice to see Canon finally coming out with a pancake, but it's not a focal length that I would have hoped for. On APS, it's a bit long for normal, but a big short for portrait. And on full frame, well, a little wider than normal would be fine. But, a full frame camera is going to be big anyway, negating the benefit of a pancake lens. So, it may be a great lens, but certainly not my first choice of focal lengths.
Absolutely. .... and the pancake lens is not so intimidating or obvious as a big zoom.
RStyga: If it's less than 20Kg I'll check it out... just kidding...:-) We need to wait for a couple of reviews, now... (preferably from bodybuilder reviewers :-))
Well, personally I like the styling of the Canon EOS-1 series, always have since it was introduced with the T90. I fnd the styling of the Nikon D3 much less pleasing, with knobs and switched etc. seemingly stuck on at random onto a kind of square-ish body.Having said that, a camera is tool so it doesn't matter really what it looks like.