Sad Joe: A 50 1.2 for the EOS-M - sounds a little crazy but why not. Seems like Samyang has more faith in the M series than do Canon themselves ! Look forward to the reviews.
It's not really a big exercise in faith. It's just a matter of sticking a dumb EOS M flange on an existing lens. I have a Rokinon 12mm f/2. Great lens. But I also own an EOS M, a Fuji X-E1, a Sony A6000, and an old Olympus E-PM1. I would love it if they sell us the mounting flanges separately so I could change flanges whenever I want. It would also be great for people switching mirrorless systems. Can't be that difficult. It's probably just a matter of unscrewing the four screws on the flange. No electrical contacts or mechanical linkages to worry about.
photomedium: Manufacturers should really be asking the question: does the universe need this?
Does the universe need anything? New cars, new clothes, new cameras? No, the universe doesn't need any of it. Heck, the universe doesn't need you either.
JakeB: I find those Sony mirrorless cameras look incredibly boxy and ugly, even worse than traditional dslrs, and for that reason alone would never carry one.
Spec sheet is impressive, though, which makes them attractive to gearheads.
Yes, we all know the one deciding factor in the purchase of any camera is its looks. LOL.
Frankly, I think they look great. A nice change from the bloated monstrosities that FF DSLRs have become.
All these holier-than-thou elitist complainers. Geez, you guys sound soooo old and out of touch. There's actually a lot of good photography on Instagram. Like anything, it just depends on who you follow. By and large, I love Instagram and I love the photography I see on Instagram , delivered to my phone by people I follow and whose photography I want to see. What's wrong with that? Oh, some elitist snob will probably complain that the only way photographs shoukd be viewed is in a gallery of prints on a wall or on your desktop computer while you're sitting at your desk! Ok, grandpa.
KAMBIC: I hope you guys have all been practicing your MF skills. F1.2 MF only? Hahaha
You also have to keep in mind that AF is not always foolproof. Focus calibration of AF cameras and AF lenses becomes even more critical when using fast lenses with shallow DOF.
I find manual focus to be quite easy with focus peaking and focus magnification offered in mirrorless cameras! It's a tortorous experience with DSLRs, even with split prism focusing screens installed, as I have in my DSLRs. But mirrorless camera focus magnification and focus peaking in the EVF makes manually focusing super easy. Also, the beauty of mirrorless cameras is that you are viewing the scene at shooting aperture all the time, and the EVF adjusts brightness accordingly.
Rod McD: Interesting designs. It's good to see independent offerings designed for mirror-less (as against DSLR lenses with extended barrels). OTOH, I'm generally suspicious of very fast WA lenses - they often have crappy corners. It's no accident that the best 21mm lenses remain slower offerings from Zeiss and Leica. Let's await some tests to see how they fare.
I'd rather have the flexibility of fast aperture speed that you can stop down for better corners. Not every image needs sharp corners. Sometimes you need the speed.
RedDog Steve: More primitive lenses ? no thanks ...
Not every lens needs the extra expense and complexity of electronic components. That's not what photography is really about.
LFPCPH: The profit on non-A,F non-auto-aperture lenses must be high - since there are so many manufactures who tries to enter that market.
No it's because they are a heck of a lot easier to make when you don't have to deal with AF motors, electronic component, electro activated apertures, and electronic compatibility the AF lenses require.
I love my Rokinon 12mm f/2! Tack sharp. Looking forward to trying these two new lenses out. Love the fast apertures!
Manual focus lenses are so much easier to focus on mirrorless cameras, thanks to focus peaking and focus magnification.
Only downside to the Rokinon lenses is that the manual focus ring is a tad stiff, at least on my 12mm f/2.
Mike Sandman: 15" laptop + tablet + FF DSLR + 6 lenses + 2 large water bottles + a tripod... Will it come with a camel to carry it?
@pkosewski- it's not about whether you *can* carry that much weight. It's about whether you want to lug around that much weight for extended periods of time and whether it's healthy or smart to do so. After years of hauling around lots of camera gear, I developed spinal disc degeneration and a pinched nerve. Trust me, it's no joke. One day you think you're as strong as an ox and you're invincible...then one day you find out your back is messed up and you aren't invincible. It happens...even to people who think it'll *never* happen to them. These days I travel with lighter mirrorless gear.
bernardf12: Now if Canon used the resources used to create this odd thing to add a built-in VF and IBIS into the M3, together with a small 35mm 1.8, they would have had a sale.
@rrccad -- IBIS rules. It gives every lens stabilization. It also opens up the door for other features such high resolution image capture using sensor shift compositing:
as well as sensor shift noise reduction and motion reduction:
As for external EVFs, too bad they take up the hotshoe, thus interfering with the use of a hotshoe flash. And too bad they protrude from out from the body, thus increasing the size of the camera so much. I use an external EVF on my Oly PEN. No more external EVFs for me. I now prefer the built-in EVFs of my Fuji X-E1 and Sony A6000.
Finally, Silent Mode! Woohoo!
rrccad: while for the enthusiasts this is a waste of time, but for the casual photographer who's SD card still has pictures on it from Christmas, when it's June out .. having so they can just drop the camera on top of the unit, have it charged, images copied off and uploaded to cloud,etc - just seems like a good thing.
one of the advantages of smartphones was the level of automation after the image was taken, this helps.
"also it's a media server and an NFC / wifi enabled streaming device so no, they aren't $50 with internal 1TB or storage .."
@rrccad - that's why I said it should it should be $150, not $50. $300 is way too high. I don't think Canon is going to sell many at that price. How many people bought the CS100?
I think one day we'll have a common standard for wireless charging and wireless download. This first iteration from Canon appears to be too proprietary and closed. If you want to be an early adopter, and you're okay with it only working with particular Canon cameras, go for it! But I'd wait for a more universal solution. Maybe one that you can also use with your smartphone, charging (via the Qi wireless charging standard) and offloading images from any wifi-enabled phone and any wifi-enabled camera, not just particular Canon cameras.
It should be priced at $150, max. Then it might stand a chance. But even at $150, I don't think it's going to be a particularly popular product. Also, I assume it's only going to be compatible with certain Canon cameras. So it's basically a closed system device? Won't work with older Canon cameras, and won't work with non-Canon cameras? If so, that'll make it an even tougher sale.
With the CS100: "Wireless image transfer is compatible only with Canon cameras and camcorders equipped with NFC and released in 2015."
"...but for the casual photographer who's SD card still has pictures on it from Christmas, when it's June out ..."
Those people most likely used a smartphone anyways. So I think this is one of those odd in-between products that won't particularly appeal to casual photographers (who are already shooting with smartphones) and it won't appeal to enthusiast photographers who would rather import their images from their SD card through Lightroom.
The first Canon Connection Station CS100 cost $299 for 1TB of storage. That seems like a lot to pay for this 1TB device, especially when you can get small external 1TB hard drives for only $50. It's going to be a tough sell, both for casual and enthusiast shooters. It reminds me of the Canon Media Storage M30/M80 from many years ago, which never went anywhere. Just another obscure footnote product.
The Lotus Eater: There seems to be a fair amount of concern as to whether Sony will offer lossless compressed files with these updates - I'm sure not many people want unnecessarily large raw files.
The terms lossless/uncompressed and lossy/compressed seem to have become almost interchangeable throughout this whole saga, to the extent that I suspect Sony's press team either doesn't understand the difference or hasn't communicated it as well as they could have.
Hopefully we can assume Sony's engineers will deal with it properly and to the satisfaction of everybody. Well, almost everybody.
I think this "lossless vs lossy" argument is much ado about nothing. We listen to lossy mp3's with no problem, and they still sound fine. Sure, you can listen to lossless music files, but most people will never hear the difference. People have to understand that there is a practical purpose for compression. And you really have to evaluate the practical effect it has on quality. You can't just have a knee-jerk, irrational "it's compressed, therefore it sucks" attitude.
At any rate, now people have a choice. And I think most people will realize that it really wasn't as big a deal as some people were making it out to be. It's not like JPEG vs RAW.
aquarta: "“The voice of our α community remains the most important guiding force of our product development plans,” said Neal Manowitz, Deputy Vice President for Digital Imaging at Sony Electronics. “The addition of Uncompressed 14-Bit RAW processing is a direct result of customer feedback. Widely requested by photo and video enthusiasts, we believe the choice of RAW processing types will further elevate the performance of these extraordinary cameras.”"
What's not to like about Sony at this moment? There should be no complaining whatsoever from any of us.
@bluevellet - personally, I saw no issue with compressed RAW because it still gave me the flexibility and quality of RAW but with smaller file size. There is, after all, a practical reason for why files are compressed. After all, mp3's are compressed, and we seem to be doing fine with it. Sure, you can listen to lossless music files, but they are much larger and most of the time you'd never be able to tell the difference anyways. Sure, there may be compromises to compression, but in this case I think the benefits of compression were good and the downsides of compression were extremely minimal.
Good to see that a camera company is listening to what their users want. Good job, Sony!
Personally, I think it was a non-issue. Or at least it was blown out of proportion relative to the practical, real world effect on images. It was just something for the whiners to latch onto. Now, hopefully, the "issue" can be put to rest.
ttran88: Canon has proven it again that mirrorless is crap. People If you want good quality images get a real camera DSLR.
Right, it's because good image quality comes from the all-important reflex mirror (you know, that mirror that has to flip out of the way in order to capture an image)! LOL, not.