Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Canon EOS M preview samples gallery

By dpreview staff on Nov 7, 2012 at 02:23 GMT
Buy on GearShop

Just Posted: Our Canon EOS M preview samples gallery. We've had a chance to shoot with the Canon EOS M, the company's first mirrorless camera, over a weekend on Santa Fe, New Mexico. Shooting exclusively with the 22mm F2 prime lens, we prepared a gallery of real-world images shot in a variety of situations and under a range of lighting conditions. In addition to camera JPEGs, we've processed a series of images at different ISO settings through the latest version of Adobe Camera Raw.

Having shot with the EOS M for four days, in a variety of circumstances, it's hard to shake the impression that a potentially promising camera risks being undermined by woefully slow autofocus. We're assured that the 18-55mm zoom lens will be faster than the 22mm prime (and the zoom's internal focus design makes that possible), but, pitched against some increasingly mature competition, it really needs to be.

The camera itself is small and subtle, and its touch-screen user interface is very likeable whether used as a point-and-shoot or when taking an interest in the deeper camera settings. However, everything you've read about the autofocus performance with the 22mm lens is true - and it's enough to spoil the shooting experience. This sample gallery should allow you to craw some conclusions about its image quality.

Huge thanks to lensrentals for lending us this production-standard Canon EOS-M.

Canon EOS-M Preview Samples - Posted 6th November 2012

There are 30 images in the preview samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples.

471
I own it
64
I want it
35
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Canon EOS M

Comments

Total comments: 130
drewpost
By drewpost (Nov 18, 2012)

I've had this camera for about 2 weeks now. Amazon UK has the black body, 18-55mm lens & flash for £648.

I've uploaded over 100 sample images I've taken the past few days for you to take a look at. I've taken most with the 18-55 kit lens but received the EF-M mount adaptor the other day so there are some taken with a 70-200mm 2.8 and a 10-22 EF-S.

This is the link (I'm at a hotel now so they are uploading slowly...)
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/22c9qngzfn608fp/eI4yl5pfyA

A few things to note from my experience so far -

- The EXIF data shows the lens as being the 22mm prime. This isn't accurate and only happens with the 18-55 attached.
- There are some flaws with the autofocus. It thinks it's acquired a lock, beeps but the image is completely out of focus. I've noticed this when shooting images with bright lights in them. Christmas trees have been really bad!
- Focus is slow, point and shoot slow, but once the bugs get fixed it will be passable.
- Let me customise to use back focus!

0 upvotes
omarspencephotography
By omarspencephotography (Nov 14, 2012)

Kit lenses have never appealed to me, Ive never owned one & I never will. I would love to see this camera tested with the EF adapter and a proper lens like a 50mm 1.4 or better yet a 50mm 1.2L. The form factor is appealing, drawing less attention than a dslr, making it a nice candidate for situations where discretion is a must.

0 upvotes
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Nov 9, 2012)

As Kodachromeguy writes, it is a fairly expensive camera for the P&P crowd, while the lack of any kind of viewfinder will scare more serious guys away (just like the 'ugly duckling' aka Pentax K-01).

As with the K-01, picture quality is not a problem (most of them impressive - but most cameras are in good lighting), other things are, in this case the 22mm lens supplied!

0 upvotes
kodachromeguy
By kodachromeguy (Nov 8, 2012)

I still believe that this is a pretty expensive camera to be selling as an upgrade to the point and hold-in-one-hand crowd. And if it is selling to a more sophisticated photographer, there is no viewfinder or optional viewfinder. It just does not make sense to me.

3 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 9, 2012)

If I had a dollar for every camera that sold superbly after I'd read in these forums that this model was too expensive for anyone to want to buy it, I'd be shooting with a solid gold Hasselblad.

1 upvote
William2684
By William2684 (Nov 8, 2012)

So many comments..
Camera is important, lens is important, but most important always person behind the camera.

2 upvotes
shahid11235
By shahid11235 (Nov 8, 2012)

Totally disappointed. Sensor performance is frustrating, noise is visible even in daylight shots. That 22mm F2 prime brings nothing to be excited about. Images are soft near the borders, and contrast seems to be low. Strong CA is visible too. None of these sample images can catch my eyes. :(

Canon engineers must have gone out of their minds.

4 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Nov 8, 2012)

Picture 3 clearly shows both. But CA is not THAT bad, I have seen much worse, although on much wider focal lengths of zooms usually. Low sharpness of corners makes me wonder if the parts of the picture were even in focus. What is the distance, about 12 feet? DoF with this sensor at the f/5.6 aperture of the shot is 55.6 ft, enough to have the tree and branches in focus I guess. So you are probably right, it is a sucky lens.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

Not sure why its that suprising. All 18 mpix from Canon behave exactly same. :) Why should this one be better, especially if its in small body..

0 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Nov 8, 2012)

most of the shots with the prime are wide open. you expect what exactly? perfection from a cheap prime? 100% mag?.. stopped down it seems to be okay .. still some CA but nothing that hopefully DLO can't handle - hopefully canon will add in the lenses. more than usable for the target market.

0 upvotes
abi170845
By abi170845 (Nov 8, 2012)

With all the shortcomings, no onboard I.S, with adapter + 10mmEFS and 430EXII Flash, it gets big! For the money, I'd rather get the 60D for the same price.

2 upvotes
shahid11235
By shahid11235 (Nov 8, 2012)

I'm using 60D and the IQ of these photos is not even close to the 60D.

0 upvotes
Marco Nero
By Marco Nero (Nov 8, 2012)

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the staff at DPreview would take the time to respond to the many members requesting they create an EOS-M forum so that owners can stop having to post in the PowerShot forum. The EOS-M is not a PowerShot. It's also not a DSLR. So why no EOS-M Forum like all the other mirrorless ICL cameras?

Other than this, I bought one and I think it's a great camera. Some lenses are clearly faster than others. The AF delay using the 18-55mm IS M-Lens is non-existant. THIS was the lens DPreview should have been using for their tests. I bought the body with EF lens mount and it's been a lot of fun to use with my EF L-Lenses. I honestly thought I'd hate the touch screen but it was fast, intuitive and very responsive in default setting. Great build and works flawlessly with the Speedlite flashes.

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 8, 2012)

Our experiences of the 18-55mm are that it's much more useable than the 22mm - which is why I mentioned it in this story. However, getting hold of one in the US isn't easy so, rather than wait for several more weeks, it seemed to make sense to use the lens we could get, when I was visiting somewhere sunny.

3 upvotes
spiderhunter
By spiderhunter (Nov 8, 2012)

Waste of money. Sony NEX series is king.

3 upvotes
wfektar
By wfektar (Nov 8, 2012)

For the full review would it be possible to try a ~symmetric WA on it? Would be nice to know how much (if any) magenta shift and or corner smearing show up on the M.

(I realize that the M is probably not designed for that. Then again I have no idea what or whom it is designed for.)

1 upvote
RedDog Steve
By RedDog Steve (Nov 7, 2012)

Only 230 shots CIPA battery life ?
Disappointing ...

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

Yes, but unfortunately low battery life is rather standart these days. Form factor is usually reason behind it.. or they are cheapskates. :D

1 upvote
wansai
By wansai (Nov 8, 2012)

The Sony Nex's (at least the lower rung models) can get much better battery life. My Nex C3, if I'm not exensively chimping, can pull out 700 shots on the standard battery despite it being rated at 400 shots.

230 shots is rather low tbh.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

With more energy hungry cams its not that happy. NEX-7 = get at least one spare. And Samsung is really bit ridiculous with this, pack at least 2 more.

Suprisingly my old m4/3s never needed more battery. Dunno why.. Today ones seem bit more energy hungry too.

I guess Canon either wanted to make it really small and light, or they want to milk some more with sold batteries.

0 upvotes
Ahmet Aydogan
By Ahmet Aydogan (Nov 7, 2012)

Wonder why there are no sample images with skin tone. Could it be that EOS M, like almost every other Canon digital camera exhibits a green/yellow crossover?

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 8, 2012)

No, it's because I was shooting with several cameras on this holiday and thought I'd taken more pictures of people with the EOS M than I actually had. The few I'd taken turned out to have subject movement in them when I got back to the office.

0 upvotes
Ahmet Aydogan
By Ahmet Aydogan (Nov 8, 2012)

Thanks for the reply.

0 upvotes
ulfie
By ulfie (Nov 7, 2012)

Even Oly's "ancient" E-PL1 w/ Panny 20/1.7 runs circles around this Canon's IQ.

3 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

Actually its about same. On other hand comparsion with OM-D or E-PL5 would really be in favor of Olympus. If E-PL5 has same image quality as OM-D (and from what I saw it has), then EOS-M is no competition for it.

When one realize, that Canon 18 mpix APS-C is on par with average m4/3 camera, then some of their cams and pricing seems a bit laughable. And attitude of some Canon owners even more..

5 upvotes
bcalkins
By bcalkins (Nov 8, 2012)

I don't know about 'running circles' around it - but having shot Canon and now owing only an OM-D system I don't see anything from the EOS-M that would make me regret my choice if you are looking for a compact system. The 22mm lens doesn't seem anything special, so you are basically headed into bigger (and more expensive) lenses to get noticeable IQ improvements over MFT... With Canon's new IS primes all starting at $899 on release, even the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 is starting to look like a bargain! While the sensor size in MFT is going to mean you can't get more DOF for a given lens choice, I find I have more 'creative control' with MFT simply because the fast primes are so much smaller that I take them with me.

0 upvotes
Robert Hoffman
By Robert Hoffman (Nov 7, 2012)

I have to say that the files from my outdated, 8mp Rebel XT cream what I'm seeing here. What's with the heavy-handed sharpening at low ISOs? There are halos everywhere. The ISO 2000 shots look worse than ISO 12,800 images from other APS-C cameras.

1 upvote
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (Nov 7, 2012)

Video will be amazing on this camera.

With bitrates around 45 mbps and frame rates of 30p, 25p, and 24p, this will be the go-to camera for compact video. Nothing in this price range comes close right now.

Only the GH2 / GH3 are comparable, but with a considerable size and cost premium. Hopefully, the GX2 will be better but for now, the EOS M is tops for compact video.

2 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Nov 7, 2012)

Meh. The sensor is lousy and uses line skipping to produce video. GH2 is not comparable, it is orders of magnitude better.

4 upvotes
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (Nov 8, 2012)

No question, the GH2 is better, but why is the GX1 not better?

All of the small cameras have low bitrates, except for the EOS M. Why?

If you want to put an Arri Alexa on your shoulder, that will also be better than the EOS M. You get my point? :)

2 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (Nov 7, 2012)

Not bad.

0 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Nov 7, 2012)

Well - even at f/2.8 the lens has some chromatic aberrations. Also the sharpening of the (in camera JPEG) is 'rough' so fine details are missing.

The sky in the 5/30 photo show some heavy artifacts what is strange as there are large files. Even ISO 100 and 200 photos show blotchy noise in shadows - something I have not expected.

The photos processed with ACR are WOLRDS better. To me that means that Canon has work to be done on JPEG engine.

2 upvotes
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Nov 7, 2012)

very nice, but not outstanding.

2 upvotes
sneakerpimp
By sneakerpimp (Nov 7, 2012)

how did they take those pictures without a viewfinder, dedicated ISO button or dual dials??

1 upvote
DaytonR
By DaytonR (Nov 7, 2012)

The same way people take photos using compact cameras and smartphones without dedicated ISO buttons,dual dials and viewfinders !!

3 upvotes
Hugo808
By Hugo808 (Nov 7, 2012)

You lot must be blind, these look tack sharp and really colourful to me. What sort of computers do you use to view?

I would have brought one of these things as a P&S but for the lousy focus speed, It really is poor, OK if it only cost $100 but not at this price.

1 upvote
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (Nov 7, 2012)

How bad is the focus speed?

0 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Nov 8, 2012)

the day shots look good on my IPS panel (most camera should in adequate light) but the low light ones... look terrible.

0 upvotes
MrPetkus
By MrPetkus (Nov 7, 2012)

I've never before joined the chorus of folks complaining about the technical quality of preview samples viewing it as bad taste.

But these pics are much worse than they ought to be and I blame the photographer. Stupid settings (e.g., high ISO, 2-stop neg exposure comp) and bad composition. You'd think a photography site, even one for gearheads, would at least have decent staff photogs.

3 upvotes
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (Nov 7, 2012)

Maybe they were demonstrating the features of the camera.

2 upvotes
Joesiv
By Joesiv (Nov 7, 2012)

it's not about the negative exposure compensation, look at the images, do they look well exposed? If so, that means the metering on the camera would have greatly overexposed the image if the photographer had not given negative compensation.

To me this seems to imply that the camera is not very good at metering at night, and might be a pain to have to baby with exposure compensation to get acceptable results. Luckily with llive view you pretty much get what you see, so you'll know right away that it's way off.

1 upvote
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Nov 7, 2012)

I have to agree with you. I've sometimes been of a negative mind about the sample photos, but I'm aware that a human being is involved who values kindness as much as the next man or woman, so I don't automatically squawk. But I would like (1) a greater number of samples (Engadget provides 57 samples; plus, you can download the lot in a 366MB file), (2) the samples to be useful for proving gear (this would rule out shots that are commendable for artistic composition, but which fall short on the score of technical demonstration), and (3) more attention to ISO quality variation. Thank you very much.

See Engadget at http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/03/canon-eos-m-review.

The samples link follows the story.

0 upvotes
timedrun
By timedrun (Nov 7, 2012)

I disagree, it's too much to expect a preview to turn out works of art. I see general images reflecting every day circumstances, sunlight, low light, mixed floodlighting, blue light etc. Lots of different compos, dof etc, what's to complain about? It's a decent start.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 7, 2012)

Well, its old sensor. So results are pretty much as expected, maybe slightly worse than expected.

Competition wise, well.. if it was released at same time as Canon 7D was (or maybe month or two later). It would be amazing. Not cause sensor from 7D, that was never particulary good, but cause it would be very nice mirrorless.

Today? Unfortunately too little, too late. It seems as if Canon thought "See, we can make mirrorless too!". Well, we knew they can. We just expect it to be at least on par with competition, if not better.

I can imagine how amazing could be mirrorless from Canon if done right, even with sensors they have. But thats all I can do.. "imagine".

6 upvotes
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (Nov 7, 2012)

Is it $200 better than a Sony RX100? If it is, it's a good camera.

0 upvotes
WT21
By WT21 (Nov 7, 2012)

I am thinking this is a very poor set of low-light test shots, and DPR is at fault here.

I have complete ZERO interest in this camera, but look at those low light shots. Almost all have negative EV dialed in. The guitarist shot has -2.33!!! What camera is going to do well in low light with a -2.33 EV? Also, these could be dialed in for high NR.

Again, I have no interest in this camera, but it seems to me the low light sample shots are like HUH???

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
Rickard Hansson
By Rickard Hansson (Nov 7, 2012)

Reason for dialing in neg EV is that you wish the image to reflect the mood, the darkness. Otherwise it will try to brighten up the scene and that would look bad.
dialing in -EV gives you an better shutter speed as well and can keep high iso down.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
12 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Nov 7, 2012)

Also the higher ISO shots are Adobe Camera RAW conversions without noise reduction, so what you see is shameless full frontal nude noise.

And Rickard Hansson is correct. I don't think they're recovered in brightness afterwards so it shouldn't matter quality wise.

Knowing ACR well, there's nothing out of the ordinary here. In fact the sensor's holding up alright considering its age. Tho for some reason the JPEGs forget to get rid of some chroma noise in the shadows, where ACR does fine.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 7, 2012)

There are a surprising number of what are essentially hot pixels in the high ISO samples, even at a relatively low ISO setting like 1250 (see random white specs in full-sized samples).

The T3i / 600D sensor has always lagged behind the 16 mp Exmor sensor. And while the low ISO IQ, as expected, looks good, the high ISO photos surprised me, and not in a good way.

The EOS M might appeal to Canon video shooters looking for a small, capable B camera, but the new mount makes even that a tough sell.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 7, 2012)

Most likely cause smaller form factor cams have much less space for proper cooling and interference is much harder to avoid.

If you look at super-small cams like GF5, NEX-C3 etc. you will see that pretty much all have really bad high ISO (or any ISO). Only C3 is somewhat usable.

Ofc that sensor is bad, but making it this small doesnt help either.

0 upvotes
lensberg
By lensberg (Nov 7, 2012)

Keep in mind that the 18 MP sensor is also relatively older than the 16 MP chip from Sony...

Having said that... when Canon introduced the 18 MP 7D all those years ago, it was state of the art... trouncing the Nikon D300S in practically every aspect - especially high ISO...

And when you say "lags behind" the 16 MP Exmor sensor - its more or less exaggeration...

To the naked eye colour depth looks identical... people might have their respective prefrences towards one company's rendition of colour... but thats about it...

High ISO performance is pretty much neck and neck upto 6400 ... Quite frankly both the 7D & D7000 look "okay" at those sensitivities... but if you're hell bent extreme ISO IQ quality then step up to full frame...

Dynamic range... well according to DXO they say Nikon - but i don't find any discernible differences... In the end its all about handling and overall IQ...

4 upvotes
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (Nov 7, 2012)

Amen lensberg.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 7, 2012)

@lensberg The only sensor doing any trouncing is the 16 mp Exmor as found in the D7000. A look at the D300s, actually shows superior all-around performance. From DxOMark:

D7000

Overall Score 80
Portrait (Color Depth) 23.5 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range) 13.9 EVs
Sports (Low-Light ISO) 1167 ISO

7D

Overall Score 66
Portrait (Color Depth) 22 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range) 11.7 EVs
Sports (Low-Light ISO) 854 ISO

D300s

Overall Score 70
Portrait (Color Depth) 22.5 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range) 12.2 EVs
Sports (Low-Light ISO) 787 ISO

600D

Overall Score 65
Portrait (Color Depth) 22.1 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range) 11.5 EVs
Sports (Low-Light ISO) 793 ISO

3 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (Nov 7, 2012)

Sure looks like some cameras is missing is that list....

1 upvote
bluevaping
By bluevaping (Nov 7, 2012)

DxOMark

That site with it scores based on raw and what they find weighs high, and based on what their software can get out of the files. The site would be better, if they left the score junk out. And left it at Portrait, Landscape, Sports sections to compare and even then you have to mentally taken in account of the camera features, usability and such.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Couscousdelight
By Couscousdelight (Nov 7, 2012)

Yep, it misses some cameras, like :

Pentax K-5

Overall Score : 82
Portrait (Color Depth) : 23.7 bits
Landscape (Dynamic Range) : 14.1 Evs
Sports (Low-Light ISO) : 1162 ISO

1 upvote
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Nov 7, 2012)

>Pentax K-5

Impressive.

1 upvote
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

K-5 is just paper impressive, in reality its a bit meh.. D7K is similar. I dont say you cant make good picture with them, but some of us can with film camera. It doesnt make film camera better than today cams.

K-5 has some kind of NR on every ISO and its within RAW. In low light at ISO 3200+ it gets really awful (cause there are color blotches thanks to RAW NR). Plus most of Pentax lens leaves a lot to be desired. There are some nice, but in same time usually ridiculously expensive.

And that DR. Heh just cause you can squeeze so much DR from camera doesnt mean that all that DR will be usable. It has 14-bits so in theory yes, in practice.. if you get 1 eV more, you can consider yourself being lucky. But most likely you will see noise as soon as on every other cam.

DxOmark is nice tool, but its a tool, not something you should really trust as "almighty sorter of good and bad cams". I recommand RAW samples, if you can get them. That works usually best.

And 7D sensor was never best.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

It was just high mpix APS-C sensor with about average performance. Which today has pretty subpar performance and even Samsung has pretty decent 20 mpix APS-C, not mentioning Sony with 24 mpix APS-C (and ofc Nikon). And all of these perform better..

So recycling that old sensor in today enviroment wasnt exactly brightest idea that Canon had.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 9, 2012)

"To the naked eye colour depth looks identical..." Not when you are manipulating it in Photoshop or Lightroom.

And what is it with these grown men and their "trouncing"?

0 upvotes
Musicjohn
By Musicjohn (Nov 7, 2012)

I personally feel that the image quality is no beter than the Canon Powershot G12 or GX1. High ISO is disappointing, and images appear to have artifacts even at ISO 100. The only advantage of this EOS-M cam is that you can exchange lenses. Nothing more, nothing less!

2 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Nov 7, 2012)

Canon has placed its bets that mirrorless is *not* the future, and positions its M as an accessory to an existing EOS DSLR setup, and as a stepping stone to the Rebel line. Considering the fact that systems are only as small as their lenses, and APS-C lenses will be APS-C lenses, it's a fair call.

0 upvotes
Shunda77
By Shunda77 (Nov 7, 2012)

This 18mp sensor was the one Noah used to document the building of the ark.

Canon are so committed to archeology, it's a credit to them.

29 upvotes
garyknrd
By garyknrd (Nov 7, 2012)

LOL The best one I have heard lately. They are so behind it is getting to be a joke.

4 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Nov 7, 2012)

Technically this is a new sensor due to its PDAF....it just happens to be 18mp. Canon may just think thats a good mid point.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

"If" it really does have PDAF, which considering focus speed is somewhat doubtful.

And that didnt really mean its a new sensor and considering output, I can bet its not new sensor tech.

1 upvote
tkpenalty
By tkpenalty (Nov 7, 2012)

They sell well because of the marketing power canon has.

As for the product....

inferior to the NEX, NX, X system. Yet it sells much more.

4 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 7, 2012)

To DPReview: I was told that the touch-to-shoot feature on the EOS-M touchscreen will speed up the AF operation by as much as 10 times as compared to the use of the shutter button. Can you verify that?

0 upvotes
Gothmoth
By Gothmoth (Nov 7, 2012)

told by whom?

1 upvote
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 7, 2012)

A friend who owns the camera. He is rather trustworthy about such things. In any case, I am keeping an open mind... Will probably verify it myself in Canon showroom downtown within the next few days...

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Nov 7, 2012)

Sure but now it's you who's saying it and your name is photo nuts.

5 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 7, 2012)

@M Jesper: and you know better because you own the camera? Or are you like Ken Rockwell who writes arm-chair reviews without even using the equipment he's reviewing?

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Nov 7, 2012)

Hey man, just adding a little humour into the mix. :)

*10 times AF seems a bit unlikely as both are the same CDAF no matter how you twist it. Unless there's new firmware.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Nov 7, 2012)

>Sure but now it's you who's saying it and your name is photo nuts.

Anyone remember the Walter Huston scene in Treasure of the Sierra Madre? That's me at this moment.

0 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Nov 8, 2012)

I mean the Walter Huston LAUGHING scene.

0 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Nov 7, 2012)

saw some low light high iso samples of this camera and my first impression is negatives so far. Too bad. And the body itself is not charming enough, as if this camera is targeting for domestic market. Canon, why you don't use retro look on this camera design? We really want to see Canonet comeback from the grave.

0 upvotes
Gothmoth
By Gothmoth (Nov 7, 2012)

we?? are you a king or why do you use "we"?

and the low light quality is good.

0 upvotes
AlanJones
By AlanJones (Nov 7, 2012)

A king or dictator uses "I" and not "we". Listen to a speech from Obama for an example.

2 upvotes
Günther Banholzer
By Günther Banholzer (Nov 7, 2012)

Obama a king or dictator?

1 upvote
hjaeger
By hjaeger (Nov 7, 2012)

I believe Gothmoth is referring to the royal "we"; sometimes called "majestic plural" :)

0 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Nov 8, 2012)

I say "we" when I have my mouse in my pocket. Whose name is Spot. King Spot.

0 upvotes
TotallyFred
By TotallyFred (Nov 7, 2012)

Funny how there is such a focus on Canon lenses for a new camera. With such a small flange distance, this little cam could be a great option to host Leica M lenses. Would be interesting to see how the camera performs when/if such an adapter pops up.

The name clash makes searching annoying though. Is there an intent from canon to undercut Leica M mount searches ? Conspiration theory :-)

0 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Nov 7, 2012)

adapter is already out in ebay btw.

0 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (Nov 7, 2012)

If you have those lenses, is this the body you have benn waiting for?

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

If you happen to have Leica M lens you already own Leica or Sony NEX (or Fuji, which with X-E1 seems as pretty promising base for Leica M). At least until Sony make finally that FF mirrorless NEX or whatever it will be.

0 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Nov 8, 2012)

If I had Leica glass, I'd fit it to a Nex 7 with it's superior grip, tri-nav, excellent EVF and focus peaking. This EOS M is pushing close to the price of a Nex 7 as it is.

I am sure it is more than an acceptable camera but considering its competition, it's a poor, poor purchase; you'd be buying it for the brand and the brand only.

1 upvote
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

Actually for Leica M wide-angles (well, most M-mount wide-angles) buying NEX-6 is much better cause.. guess what? It finaly doesnt have color shift and detail smearing in corners.. yipee! :)

NEX-7 works fine, but for wide-angles you need regular dSLR design or you loose all detail in corners and get pretty nasty color shift.

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Nov 7, 2012)

People carry on and on about fixed lenses on small camera and what a deal breaker it is, yet when a brand new small Canon has interchangeable lenses, it still cannot produce images half as good as RX100.

There goes that argument.

12 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 7, 2012)

Really? You mean the 1" sensor in RX100 is better than an APS-C sensor? Please go read the RX100 review on this site.

3 upvotes
Gothmoth
By Gothmoth (Nov 7, 2012)

well he obviously is a clown....

0 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (Nov 7, 2012)

@Photo nuts , no he said "cannot produce images half as good as" ...
- Then if that is true or not is another matter, and may well differ depending on scene and circumstances.

0 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Nov 7, 2012)

Yes, the RX100 sensor is arguably better. It has a DxOMark score of 66 while the Canon sensor has 62.

The Canon sensor is a lousy APS-C sensor. The Sony has 1 stop more dynamic range, which is important to me.

11 upvotes
fatdeeman
By fatdeeman (Nov 7, 2012)

Indeed there is nothing overly impressive about this sensor, it's always been noisy even at lower ISOs, you can see how much NR is taking place even at ISO 100 on those jpegs. Back when the sensor was new many considered it to be relatively good at higher ISO but very poor at ISO 100-400. Sony's 16mp APS-C sensor absolutely trounces it with ease so it's not beyond the realms of possibility to believe the 1" Sony could equal it.

I have a 60d and a 5n and after using both for a while now I always find myself wishing the Canon has the Sony sensor too. There's nothing worse than opening up a batch of 60D files to find noise at ISO100, especially in areas of low detail and clouds and haze etc, once you apply some mild adjustments such as curves and levels the noise increases too, once I've finished with an ISO 100 shot I usually have to run it though topaz denoise, I just don't have that problem with the Sony until ISO 400-800.

9 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Nov 7, 2012)

@fatdeerman
I agree. ISO 100 shots are uninspiring. I feel there's some noise or grit in the shadows. I have a 500D with just a kit lens and feel the IQ is no different.

2 upvotes
LyonChen1110
By LyonChen1110 (Nov 7, 2012)

Well, can Dpreview do no more Preview with only sample gallery? Most review web sites can do that also. It is the studio comparison tool to make Dpreivew stand out from others. Please at least preview with studio tool, even better with dynamic range or full review. I check Dpreview much less frequently as before.

7 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Nov 8, 2012)

>I check Dpreview much less frequently as before.

Goes for me too.

0 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 7, 2012)

Does DPReview have any insider news about potential firmware fixes for this AWFUL AF speed in the EOS-M? ;)

2 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Nov 7, 2012)

don't use the 22mm pancake (or any STM pancake) for speed.

well documented when even the 40mm pancake came out - that was it was going to be around twice as slow to focus as the normal STM's.

0 upvotes
LyonChen1110
By LyonChen1110 (Nov 7, 2012)

Well, can Dpreview do no more Preview with only sample gallery? Most review web sites can do that also. It is the studio comparison tool to make Dpreivew stand out from others. Please at least preview with studio tool, even better with dynamic range or full review. I check Dpreview much less frequently as before.

1 upvote
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (Nov 7, 2012)

This EOS M is as predictable as the comments associated (it will depend a lot how Canon will develop this product - if they plan to make it as successful as the Rebel - or XXD- series, well, no rush, let's wait for round two; if after round two we will get mid -please note that I do not say poor- performance again... ). Cheers! :)

2 upvotes
wootpile
By wootpile (Nov 7, 2012)

Samples lik these say little about the camera but what they do show is that the pancake is just about useless. Just look at those corners. Too bad, as it looked like a excellent small HiQ combo

0 upvotes
Robert Garcia NYC
By Robert Garcia NYC (Nov 7, 2012)

That's all canon!

1 upvote
kucink132
By kucink132 (Nov 7, 2012)

way to go canon!

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

Straight towards self-destruction? :D

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 7, 2012)

As a Canon user, although not interested in EOS M, I have to admit those low light photos look awful.

But I'd want to see it with a better lens, as the awfulness is in the lens, not the sensor.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Nov 8, 2012)

The sensor is the worst APS-C sensor in use in new cameras for more than 2 years already. Even smaller sensors in cameras as cheap as Olympus E-PM2 beat it already. And the lens, despite being a prime, gives worse sharpness than most kit zooms. And Canon AF and processors are slow.

Canon really just sells their reputation at this point.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Nov 9, 2012)

Pretty emphatic for someone who posts mostly in "Beginner's Questions." I have a range of cameras, and I find that less than true.

1 upvote
Mike604
By Mike604 (Nov 7, 2012)

I was really looking forward to Canon's mirror-less camera but after seeing these photos, I am a bit disappointed.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Nov 7, 2012)

You're looking at JPEGs probably set at default coming from the 22mm pancake lens. Only a fool would think any meaningful conclusions could be drawn about the camera from these photos at this point.

0 upvotes
waitformee
By waitformee (Nov 7, 2012)

If other camera with the same settings can give better quality then there is conclusion.

4 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Nov 7, 2012)

Oh, so what were the settings? What was the noise reduction setting? What algorithm does this camera use for noise reduction? Same as all the others? There's such a thing as knowing just enough to get yourself into trouble, and we are all ignorant of the context surrounding these shots. Tell me what camera with the same settings we're talking about, while you're at it? I'm guessing you were talking about the photographic hardware settings like shutter speed, ISO, and apeture. That's a very simplistic view.

0 upvotes
Mike604
By Mike604 (Nov 7, 2012)

To me it actually does say a lot about the camera and how it meters,handles low light and the way it performs in different situations. Being fairly new to photography, I have seen a few other cameras that have performed considerably better, even if it be only jpeg images, yet being priced in a similar fashion.

1 upvote
papamac
By papamac (Nov 7, 2012)

man howardroark, could you be just a bit more combative and negative to anyones comments? take a prozak and chill out a bit

4 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Nov 7, 2012)

When I first got my Nex C3, the lowest Nex range (and bloody cheap to boot) it could do low light with either of the kit lense quite a bit better than these sample shots.

I guess what I'm saying is, I'm sure you could get better low light with the eos M on manual (or with appropriate settings) but if standard settings look like they don't deliver, it just makes the camera look poor (even if it's not).

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Nov 7, 2012)

Papa, I'm afraid I don't have the same patience for stupidity others have. The oversimplification of these issues by so many people is really astounding and in the face of such overwhelming incomprehension I see no reason to be anything but blunt. Allowing idiotic statements to stand without calling them exactly what they are will only lead others to believe they also know more than they actually know.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Nov 7, 2012)

Shame on the Canon engineers responsible for autofocus performance. They should have done better.

9 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Nov 7, 2012)

Yeah, they should have hired you since apparently you're the engineer that could have done better.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Nov 7, 2012)

Shame on engineers! Bad, bad engineers! You should have done more despite engineering being the only consideration in producing a camera! Jeez, why didn't you tell the egg heads to spend more money on the awesome hardware you wanted to design and build? Engineers are so dumb and don't use all of their power to get their way....I mean, since they're in charge of everything and all.
People who blame engineers for everything don't have the first clue what an engineer does all day long. For your information, they spend most of their day being told by idiots to quit trying to solve problems despite being there for that express reason.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Nov 7, 2012)

OK, shame on Canon management, for the poor autofocus performance of this camera. They are ultimately responsible product design/quality.

11 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Nov 7, 2012)

They should license the one from Nikon 1 ;-).

2 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (Nov 7, 2012)

Really strange noise performance...like the Nikon D5200 I don't like the salt and pepper noise...its actually worse on this old 18MP sensor than it is on the 24MP D5200. Is it because its constantly in liveview and thus had higher thermal noise? My 600D at high ISO never looked this salt and peppery...

3 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Nov 7, 2012)

Camera was a non-starter anyway, next to the competition, especially Fuji.

4 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Nov 7, 2012)

The jpg's look pretty average in all honesty. Not crisp at all.

2 upvotes
Adrian Joseph Roy
By Adrian Joseph Roy (Nov 7, 2012)

Meanwhile, cameras like the OM-D and NEX-7 are sporting blazingly accurate and fast AF, superb high ISO, offering up a host of really attractive prime lenses, and all for somewhat reasonable price tags.

Canon, I've been with you since my first EOS-3 SLR. It's been an awesome ride so far. But you're breaking my f*%#ing heart over here.

18 upvotes
g7star
By g7star (Nov 7, 2012)

Well, it's just first round... Got to admit a long way to catch up though.

5 upvotes
TotallyFred
By TotallyFred (Nov 7, 2012)

Yep. The first Nex 5 was just good and had few lenses and it took a while to get lenses. Seems they are on track now though. Canon has a long way to go.

0 upvotes
Steve
By Steve (Nov 7, 2012)

me too. i've used canon and nikon since 1992 and i'd love to have a great mirrorless from them, but at the moment, my next ilc may very well be an OMD. i bet they will give in at some point .. (or mirrorless will die .. whichever comes first).

0 upvotes
Damo83
By Damo83 (Nov 8, 2012)

They will probably still sell loads of them.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Nov 8, 2012)

Mirrorless wont die, they will just evolve with better AF and then we probably loose dSLRs. A99 is first of these: FF + CDAF + PDAF + EVF. And most likely not last.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Nov 7, 2012)

It's really fantastic to have an expensive and awesome rear end lens cap to plop on those massive white telephoto behemoths...

.

3 upvotes
Total comments: 130