Previous news story    Next news story

Canon announces EOS M2 in Japan

By dpreview staff on Dec 3, 2013 at 12:29 GMT

Canon has announced the EOS M2 in Japan. An updated version of its EOS M mirrorless camera, the new model promises faster autofocus due to the use of a Hybrid CMOS II sensor, as seen in the EOS 100D / SL1. It also has built-in Wi-Fi and a slightly revised body design. It will be sold either body-only or in kits with one, two, or all three EF-M lenses, and be available in either black or white.

Aside from the sensor and Wi-Fi, the changes compared to the EOS M appear to be very subtle. The mode dial has been redesigned, with a separate position for the P/Av/Tv/M 'Creative' mode group, and the camera is slightly smaller in volume (by 8%). There are a couple of changes to movies - Canon's 3x-10x digital zoom makes a welcome reappearance, and the stereo microphones have moved to the front of the camera. Continuous shooting speed has also slightly increased, to 4.6 fps compared to 4.3 fps.

The EOS M2's built-in Wi-Fi can be used both for image transfer to a smartphone, and for remote control using Canon's free 'EOS Remote' app. The Hybrid CMOS II sensor promises 2.3x faster autofocus, and its phase detection pixels cover a substantially larger area of the frame - approximately 80% overall. This means that the EOS M should offer the same improved autofocus as we noted with the EOS 100D compared to the EOS 700D, although Canon fans will doubtless be disappointed that the EOS 70D's 'Dual Pixel AF' hasn't found it's way to the EOS M line.

Canon has confirmed that the EOS M2 won't be sold in either the European or North American markets.

Canon EOS M2 Kit configurations

Kit Bundled items Body Colour Price 
Body only   - Black ¥64800
18-55mm kit 
  • EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
  • Speedlite 90EX 
Black / White  ¥84800 
Two lens kit 
  • EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
  • EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
  • Speedlite 90EX 
  • Mount adapter EF-EOS M
Black / White  ¥104800
Three lens kit 
  • EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
  • EF-M 11-22mm f.4-5.6 IS STM
  • EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
  • Speedlite 90EX 
  • Mount adapter EF-EOS M
Black / White  ¥134800 

Read more (in Japanese)

Additional images

Via: DCWatch, Source: Canon Japan

Comments

Total comments: 616
12345
Shaun Overmeyer
By Shaun Overmeyer (3 months ago)

I know that the M series has been criticised for being an incomplete system and using EF lenses takes away from the compactness. These are valid complaints, I however want to use it as a travel camera.

I regularly travel with a 500mm f/4 and a 300 f/2.8 lens and would love to have a back up body that's pocket size. Unfortunately the M focus speed made this impractical and I'm really hoping that Canon has got it right and it is not just marketing hype. I am in no mood to spend a whole lot of cash only to be disappointed again and after reading the review at the link that follows im really thinking it's best to wait and see.
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_M2/

1 upvote
tommy leong
By tommy leong (4 months ago)

when you match it with a zoom lens, its no longer as small.
So that lose the attraction of the compact size.

The next best thing is still EOS 100D for small compacts
and fast acting camera.

0 upvotes
fanedi
By fanedi (4 months ago)

no tilting screen .. no EVF .. not interesting

7 upvotes
creisti86
By creisti86 (4 months ago)

I wonder if they'll release new lenses, as I thought the rumour was before the announcement. Does anyone have any news on that?

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

the current three are very good ones and I have the impression that Canon will at least make more EF-M lenses than EF-S.

3 upvotes
creisti86
By creisti86 (4 months ago)

I have the 18-55 and the 22mm f2. I find myself using the 22mm most of the time, it is small and super sharp wide open.

I found the 11-22 to be too expensive (for me it was about the same price as the kit body+18-55+90EX flash). I bought a third party EF-S adapter (meke), a sigma 70-300, a canon 50mm f1.8 and just ordered a samyang 8mm fisheye which is due to arrive.

So I'm pretty much covered on all focal lenghts, but I would have liked smaller EF-M lenses.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

11-22 is a high quality lens at reasonable price (at least compared with EF-S10-22, a landmark lens). there will be new EF-M lenses (and bodies) coming so better refrain from buying dedicated SLR APS-C ones.

1 upvote
gabriel67
By gabriel67 (4 months ago)

WHY can't they understand.
We expect something closer to Fuji X series!!!
This is the same useless buff they made before but newer..
FAIL

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

Fuji X is an inferior system for
low quality sensor (omission of LPF),
low quality lenses (still is okay at the cost of video).

I know many don't like video which is the future.
still has no future and can survive only as part of video.

2 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

And I guess drawings and paintings can only survive as part of cartoons?

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

> drawings and paintings

it's cost using availabe technology. a whole new world at a higher level will be open to us that video will mean better still (why still cameras still cannot beat human eyes, a pair of video cameras).

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
peter42y
By peter42y (2 months ago)

Camera is awesome, Gabriel. Actually I bought 2. If you read reviews of people who actually bought it...,you will see people are happy . Amazon France : Customers give EOS-M 4,5 out of 5 stars. Amazon Germany : 4,5 out of 5. Amazon US : 4 out of 5 stars. I give the camera 4,7 out of 5 stars. Meanwhile your wonderful Fuji X has backfocus issues, acording to some.

0 upvotes
keekimaru
By keekimaru (4 months ago)

The EOS M2 includes Hybrid CMOS AF II, an updated autofocus system that Canon said is faster than the M's system. It also gets Wi-Fi support, but the sensor is still an 18-megapixel model that tops out at ISO 12,800, or 25,600 if you enable its higher-noise expanded range. The new camera is also 8% smaller than its predecessor, with built-in Wi-Fi, and a redesigned mode dial.

Read More - http://webcamerawebcamera.com/detail.php?id_detail=22

1 upvote
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (4 months ago)

Well as I predicted the poor old M2 is getting the same level of 'respect' that the M got. I love using my 2x EOS-M's with my all EF, EF-S, M and classic FD glass. That gives me 18 lenses….Such a joy to use my old FD glass all over again with simple cheap adapters. Its fun to use, in a strange way it takes me back to my very first camera which was a rangefinder - small compact but very high MADE IN JAPAN quality. Please guys if you have no plans to buy one nor even try one - shut up…..if Canon have made a mistake (and I don't think they have) then its their problem. If your a Canon owner and you don't fancy a Canon CSC - shop elsewhere rather than just moan. Panasonic make some great cameras….Myself I look forward to the higher spec version of the M - the M2 S or M3 (or whatever they will call it) stacked with 70D tech it mid 2014….

11 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (4 months ago)

Since it's not that different from the M, M2 gets the respect it deserves.

And don't tell us to shut up, this is the front page, not the EOS M sub forum. People are free to react to the news of this product.

8 upvotes
codeape
By codeape (3 months ago)

Same here - I have the kit with the EF/EF-S adapter (as I had a canon SLR before) and happily use all of my old lenses. A nice "surprise" was how easy it was to add FD lenses (which I think they should market), so I have a zoom lens older than I am for playing around with.
Most of the time I can use the 22mm lens when wandering around town, but if I want to do something a little more serious I have the option.

1 upvote
vroger1
By vroger1 (4 months ago)

The only point seems to be an attempt to be on the mirrorless bandwagon. The camera was badly thought out- had terrible handling (somewaht improved with the firmware upgrade). A digicam of which Canon should be thoroughly ashamed. Nikon with its "1" series and Canon with its M- its as though they were someone who thinks they are "above the law". The law in this case being a reasonable consumer's wishes.

0 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (4 months ago)

Well I use BOTH Canon & Nikon (I prefer my Canon's) and yes Canon with their EOS-M and Nikon with their Series 1 cameras have made mistakes and both have failed to sell in the projected numbers. But their both improving and will become big sellers over time. I think Sony are the biggest threat and their FF CSC cameras seem to have all the answers - well done Sony. I like the Panasonic GH range for their VIDEO performance and Olympus for their lovely Zukio glass. But none of these brands will win me over as I prefer the IMAGE created by Canon cameras….

3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

The problem with the "1" series is that it will ALWAYS have that tiny sensor. Meanwhile, Canon will continue to steadily improve their EOS M system, and they were smart enough to build it around a much larger APS-C sensor. I think Canon is taking it slow and steady with EOS M...which is fine right now since mirrorless doesn't have a very serious adoption rate yet.

3 upvotes
James Qi
By James Qi (4 months ago)

Is there a point to the EOS M line? Maybe Canon decided reduce the amount of tax they would have to pay on their profits.

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

I think EOS M is a continued work in progress. Canon doesn't need to make much money off of it. But they can continually re-iterate and improve the product until they will make fools of all those who doubted what Canon was doing. Canon has a long history of people doubting what they were doing.

2 upvotes
Anastigmat
By Anastigmat (4 months ago)

I am glad Canon uses the APS-C format for its mirrorless cameras. Pentax and Nikon are making huge mistakes using sensors smaller even than M4/3. Moving in the other direction is Sony, with its full frame mirrorless camera. In a few years, you will find that the only M4/3, and the Nikon and Pentax mirrorless cameras for sale are found inside glass cases in your local pawnshop.

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

Pentax had an APSC sensored mirroless, excellent image quality.

Digital camera bodies lose value so quickly that few can be pawned, except say the D4, M9, D3s, D700.

1 upvote
mattmtl
By mattmtl (4 months ago)

The smaller sensor formats have the big plus of making smaller lenses possible.

And just as m43 has caught up to APS-C in most ways that actually matter to most people, 1" tech will probably get there sooner or later, too. Not so sure about the 1/1.7 now found in the Q, but that too is more than adequate for most people most of the time.

So... I wouldn't take it as a given that APS-C is *the* future. There are so many viable sensor formats now that several different ones can have *a* future. Choice is good.

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

we should be able to mirror f/0.7 lenses for mirrorless,
about f/1.1 equiv. for APS-C and f/1.4 equiv. for 4/3" sensors.

so 4/3" isn't too small a sensor format.
the low quality of 4/3" mostly comes from the small lenses.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
SMPhoto
By SMPhoto (4 months ago)

I'm not quite so convinced. As primarily a FF shooter, I want to agree with you. Bigger sensors are always better, within a given technology generation. And that, to me, is the key. Right now the 36mp FF sensor from Nikon/Sony is king. No smaller sensor can match it. That said, there is no doubt the best 24mp APS-C sensors exceed, in most aspects, the capabilities of 1st generation FF sensors. Likewise, current M4/3 and even 1" sensors are better in most respects than 1st or 2nd generation APS-C sensors. Why I think this is relevant, is that for 99% of consumers (not me, I sell large prints) there is a "IQ ceiling" that once exceeded, they will benefit little if any by more. Most people don't print larger than 8x10, or view larger than 1920x1080 on computer. A sensor that can provide a sharp, relatively noise free image at up to 3200 ISO, with modest cropping in that size range is all they need. Currently M4/3 is there, and 1" isn't far off. Then it becomes about size and price.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

In the days of film, you could make sharp, essentially grainless 16x20 prints from 6x7 but not from 6x4.5 or 35mm. Nikon used to advertise that 35mm was perfect for everything, until they started making large format lenses.

I'm sure things will improve but from what I've seen so far, APS is about the lower threshold of no-compromises quality. This seems to be the sweet spot, with larger not being that much better and smaller being noticeably not as good (although fine for most users.)

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
SMPhoto
By SMPhoto (4 months ago)

True, but a great percentage of professional photographers sold 16x20 prints to clients from 6x4.5 cameras, myself included, more than anything because of the economics of shooting 6x7 for things like weddings, portraits, etc., and those clients were perfectly happy with the results. 35mm could do acceptable 16x20s, but IMO only under the best of circumstances, such as 25-50 speed slide film enlarged directly on positive to paper prints, like Cibichrome, otherwsie I never thought much of it. My point was that fewer and fewer people are printing large these days. Unfortunately, if it's good enough for Facebook, or the Apple TV, it's good enough for most people.

0 upvotes
CNY_AP
By CNY_AP (4 months ago)

Well, engineers look to the future and clearly sensors are getting higher and higher SNR over time. The M4/3 images are much cleaner than my old Canon Rebel 450/Xsi, which was the best sensor at the time (and the last time Canon had the lead - arg!).

While M4/3 (and all other sensor sizes) will get better and better over time, nothing will make a large camera small. Buying a full frame camera and lenses is already overkill for most people by far, and even more so as better full frame (and smaller) sensors are released.

The improvement in technology has allowed the size of the m4/3rds cameras (which were pretty poor at first) to become sufficient (they already beat Canon APC in my opinion). The 16MP sensor in the latest m4/3rds cameras are amazing - it's even Roger's favorite camera apparently. Or is he just an amateur?

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

I totally agree. I use m4/3, but I recently bought an EOS M kit because 1) it was super cheap, and 2) because I still prefer a larger sensor format. m4/3 is still pretty good, though. It would be the smallest ILC format I would settle for. Anything smaller is a no-go for me. That means Nikon and Pentax MILC are out.

1 upvote
SRT3lkt
By SRT3lkt (4 months ago)

EOS Mediocre 2

10 upvotes
LensElf
By LensElf (4 months ago)

I'm one of those waiting on the fence with these types of cameras. I think it looks nice, but I would want it with more buttons.
For now, I'll wait and just keep my Nikon dslr and my compact G1X.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

Even though I use m4/3, in the long run I know I'd still rather have APS-C...just like in the 4/3 vs APS-C DSLR battle. That's why I bought an EOS M, 22mm EF-M, 18-55mm EF-M, and 90EX flash last week...all for $379. I'm getting in while it's cheap. Canon is taking its time in mirrorless, but it'll get there. But at least they have the larger APS-C format, which is something that m4/3 obviously won't ever have. So I'm just planning long term for the future. Plus, I consider m4/3 to be a stop-gap system to tide me over while Canon slowly eases into mirrorless.

5 upvotes
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

I should point out that I am also a Canon DSLR user, so obviosly I would prefer to stay within the Canon EOS family, as opposed to going with Sony mirrorless. Thats why I eventually want to have EOS M as my sole compact mirrorless system. I can be patient. In the meantime, I'm enjoying m4/3, and will hopefully soon take delivery of my EOS M kit.

0 upvotes
Resom
By Resom (4 months ago)

I read this very oten from the Canon user side, that "Canon is taking its time in mirrorless, but it'll get there" and "the mirrorless markt is only to burn money".

It must be a pain, to be a Canonian?

btw - I think that the EOS M is fine, if the user "know" the drawbacks. But there are other fine cameras outside and available.

4 upvotes
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

"It must be a pain, to be a Canonian?"

Not really. Most Canonians are still happily shooting away with their Canon DSLR's. Others, like myself, are using m4/3 mirrorless to fulfill their mirrorless kicks. And now that I'll soon have an EOS M, I'll enjoy that, too. I just don't see that many Canonians in a mad rush to go all-in with a full Canon mirrorless system.

I think it would be a bigger pain to have invested too much money in m4/3 if what I really want is APS-C. For me, sensor size still matters, just as much as it did when we were comparing 4/3 DSLRs vs APS-C DSLRs. I just don't think that such a consideration should be ignored just because we're talking about mirrorless.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Resom
By Resom (4 months ago)

Well, if you want APS-C, you have invested too much money in MTF, because you bought one.
I guess the most people are happy with their choice and Canon don´t need to deliver a mirrorless camera.

But all this talking about, like "Canon walks slooooow, but will be at the end the winner" or "mirrorless market is a dead end, Canon ist too smart for it", and so on.

Thats what I mean with "it must be a pain", to defend a brand. And this brand doesn´t show the same solidarity to the fans/user/...

Relabel cameras can´t be a solution.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

It isn't a pain to defend a brand but with all due respect, it is awfully stupid. They have marketing departments where people are paid to do that.

My guess is that Canon isn't particularly enthusiastic about mirrorless because even the "exciting" mirrorless cameras don't sell well in the US. You can see the stats on Thom Hogan's site.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

@Resom - no, I haven't invested "too much money" in m4/3. I got my worth out of it, and then some. I could sell it off, or I could just keep it, it's all fine with me. But it has certainly served its intended purpose as an interim MILC system for me. I got my return on my "investment."

As for Canon, I think they'll do just fine with mirrorless. After all, mirrorless still isn't burning up the sales charts just yet. Go look at Amazon's Best Sellers in DSLR's list (which also includes MILC, since MILC isn't big enough to warrant its own list yet). Last time I checked, the first 40 spots were occupied by various DSLR bodies, kits, and packages. The first MILC's to show up on the list were the Panny GH3 (#41) and the Sony A3000 (#45).

So by the time mirrorless really takes off, Canon will be ready. Until then, mirrorless is a continued work-in-progress for Canon. Canon is a big, smart, methodical company. They didn't get to their position by accident.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Bhima78
By Bhima78 (2 weeks ago)

Remember... you aren't just buying a sensor, you are buying into a whole camera system. The lenses on offer for this Canon Mirrorless system are mediocre at best when you compare them to what is on offer for the m4/3's line of cameras.

0 upvotes
Treeshade
By Treeshade (4 months ago)

"Canon has the largest market share right now."
So did Internet Explorer.

"Many people actually own the EOS M."
So did Internet Explorer.

"It is simple and friendly to use, fulfilling basic needs."
So did Internet Explorer.

"And the new version got a speed boost"
So did Internet Explorer.

4 upvotes
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

That has got to be the lamest comparison I've ever heard. IE came pre-installed on Windows. You didn't go out and get it by choice, and you certainly didn't pay for it. So the comparison to Canon is ridiculous because Canon doesn't come "pre-installed". You gotta buy Canon by choice, and you have to pay money for it. And Canon has been doing it quite successfully for a long time.

7 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (4 months ago)

"And Canon has been doing it quite successfully for a long time."
Um... so has...

1 upvote
Treeshade
By Treeshade (4 months ago)

Photographers came pre-installed with Canon lens.

Or, I could replace "IE" with "Windows", or "Nokia", or "Blackberry", or "film camera". The argument is the same: IE/Windows/Canon have the most market share doesn't mean they are good in any way.

3 upvotes
Avobanana
By Avobanana (4 months ago)

Previous poster got it right.

Complacency leads to downfall. Blackberry and Nokia are prime examples. Many people who owned shares of those companies after iphone was launched said the same thing "we have the biggest market share". This really means nothing in the tech world. People can switch in the blink of an eye, although it maybe harder for people heavily invested in lenses and other support accessories.

As of now nothing as disruptive as the iphone as yet appeared on the camera market, but if rivals keep innovating boldly and canon keep churning out these "AF 50% faster and body 5% smaller" nonsense they will lose market eventually.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

Avobanana:

Just a reminder, the first iPhone was glitchy for at least a month. It was also quite slow as a web access device over cell networks. Then it was more than a few iterations before the iPhone worked well as a phone.

Right the GUI was brilliant, and came at a time of vastly increasing battery and mobile CPU capacities.

Disrupting the market for Canikon is harder, people who know how to use all of the features of a good mirrorless body like the Sony Nex 5R or the Fuji XE2 all know how to use a DSLR too. There's nothing that makes the mirrorless systems brilliantly better, the way the iPhone GUI was so much better than a Windows phone. (Blackberry suffered more from a slow OS and lack of real web features than lack of a good early touch screen interface--the current Blackberry Z10 is a bit better than the iPhone so long as you don't need Apple apps.)

1 upvote
CNY_AP
By CNY_AP (4 months ago)

Isn't IE still #1?

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (4 months ago)

@Avobanana - "Complacency leads to downfall."

So are you yet *another* person who is predicting Canon's downfall?!?! Hahaha. I've heard people like you making the same prediction about Canon every year since the late 80's.

Canon is developing their mirrorless product. They are building a good foundation. They picked a good sensor size. They continue to iterate. In the meantime, the mirrorless market isn't exactly burning up the sales charts yet. Just look at Amazon's "Best Sellers in DSLRs" list (which also included MILCs, since MILCs isn't big enough to warrant its own list yet). In this heavy buying season, DSLRs occupy the first 40 spots (!) on the list. The first MILC to appear on the list is the Panasonic GH3 at #41, followed by the Sony A3000 at #45.

http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Camera-Photo-Digital-SLR-Cameras/zgbs/photo/3017941#1

So your notion of "complacency" is ill-founded. Canon are working on MILC, and the market is still in its infancy.

1 upvote
srados
By srados (4 months ago)

Available on e-bay one lens kit with flash for around 1000$,Shipped from Japan...So that means available here too.

0 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (4 months ago)

"Canon's 3x-10x digital zoom makes a welcome reappearance" Digital zoom? You what? What did they pay you to write that? From DPR's OWN GLOSSARY: "The recommended approach is to shoot [...] with digital zoom OFF and crop it later the way you want it." So you're recommending a feature that you also recommend not using? Whoa!

9 upvotes
echelon2004
By echelon2004 (4 months ago)

Press release

0 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (4 months ago)

No, that's DPR's own text.

1 upvote
Lawrencew
By Lawrencew (4 months ago)

If you read it properly, you will see that is in reference to movie mode, where as with other brands not just Canon, cameras can take advantage of the larger sensor to provide a 'digital zoom' without reducing the resolution of 1920x1080 HD videos. In Canon's case that means the 3x digital zoom has no impact on the resulting HD video and is fantastic for things like long-range wildlife videos. (though above 3x is reducing resolution)

5 upvotes
dpalugyay
By dpalugyay (4 months ago)

Dear Canon,
Is this a joke? I'm glad I stopped waiting for you to make a real MILC. This is another (more?) pitiful attempt. By the way, on your next try, at least add an EVF or the ability to slap one on. Maybe borrow the outstanding VF-4 from Olympus.

2 upvotes
inorogNL
By inorogNL (4 months ago)

vf-4 = epson :)

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Panel in VF-4 - epson. Optics? Electronics?

0 upvotes
Koemans
By Koemans (4 months ago)

18 megapixel - brand new from 2008. 2.7 times faster than the m1 failure but a dumbed down video mode, since the 70d technology is not in it for the sake of product diversification. Calling it now, Canon is desperately trying to become the new Kodak.

Atleast it has not been announced for release in the US & europe from what i read on canonrumors. Good choice there canon, we no longer want to buy outdated underperforming junk for the highest price.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

"Calling it now, Canon is desperately trying to become the new Kodak."

Because some how mirrorless bodies are going to kill of DSLRs. And then there'll be no more sales of FF video cameras, photocopiers, printers, what? Not.

Kodak acted like a conventional typewriter manufacturer circa 1979, instead of realizing that it had all this incredible tech and chemistry to sell to the world, Kodak sought to hang the preservation of its business on the equivalent of typewriters. AMOLD screens, which is 35 year old Kodak tech, are about to replace every TV and monitor.

Canon is not acting in the same manor. The 5D III is "underperforming", against what? Yes, for lowlight the D4 from Nikon is better, who cares? The 5D is still an excellent camera.

Canon makes excellent video cameras. Panasonic+Sony should be deeply embarrassed by the prosumer Canon G30 video camera.

1 upvote
Koemans
By Koemans (4 months ago)

5D - 2799 euro
22.3 megapixel
6FPS
Buffersize :

~18 RAW files

6D which is supposed to compete with the D610..
I wont even post the specs here, since its just laughable and yet they still ask nearly the same price as the D610.. i wont even pay 1200 euro for it. GPS, great feature for studio work.. LOL

Nikon D610 - 1729 euro
24.3 megapixel
6FPS
Buffersize : ~16 RAW files

Nikon D800 : 2139 euro
36.3 megapixel
4FPS
Buffersize : 19

Nikon D800E : 2899 euro

Same specs as the D800.

Yes, the canon is an excellent camera.. almost on-par with the D610 except they ask the price of a D800E. For studio work, the D800E destroys the canon in every way. More megapixel - while the sharpness and quality might be similar - will ALWAYS win it for me if the customer demands a bigger print. For sportphotography, the D610 destroys the 5D because of its identical specs and 800 euro's lower price.

How dare you defend a company that lacked innovation for the past 5 years now?!

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

k:

Quote:

“More megapixel - while the sharpness and quality might be similar - will ALWAYS win it for me if the customer demands a bigger print.”

Then get a Leica S2. More megapixels often get in the way, in the realworld outside of the studio, hence the Nikon D4/Df.

Canon makes excellent DSLRs, so too Nikon.

You ignored everything else Canon makes, you ignored the 1D X, in your MP obsession.

I can’t draw conclusions about the 6D, I’ve barely handled it and don’t have raws from it.

Most people don’t limit their shooting to studios, even with the D800E. Bigger prints obviously cost more to print–guess that’s fine if you have a paying client, get your client to put up the monies for a Leica S2.

Try thinking before launching a knee jerk attack on Canon. My understanding of dual pixel AF: That’s real innovation from Canon.

Big deal neither Canon nor Nikon has a great large sensored mirrorless system, though at least Nikon makes enough lenses and made a waterproof version.

1 upvote
Eugeniu Sofroni
By Eugeniu Sofroni (4 months ago)

Koemans, the D610 is a D600 with a fix for the shutter ... you don't complain about how ridiculous that is, you praise the camera "change" but the M2 got smaller, got WiFi, boost in AF speed ... and that to you somehow it is insignificant because you hate the brand, that is the opposite of something you are infatuated with, i pity you.

0 upvotes
Mike tn
By Mike tn (4 months ago)

The EOS-M is $299 at B&H right now. What point and shoot or CSC for $299 will outdo it in image quality?

3 upvotes
benny_wong
By benny_wong (4 months ago)

Many m43 can do, also nex5n, nex f3 are that price point

11 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (4 months ago)

IQ is only the tip of the ice berg, if you cant focus, what good is the best IQ. If you only have 3 native lenses and the rest large DSLR lenses, will you leave your kit at home with the DSLR? what good is the best IQ if you aren't compelled to use it.

7 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (4 months ago)

Apparently, any current gen m43 will outdo an APS-C Canon:

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-versus-Canon-EOS-70D-versus-Canon-EOS-7D___909_895_619

That's what happens when you use the same sensor for 5 years. Competition catches up, even with a sensor 40% smaller.

4 upvotes
Eugeniu Sofroni
By Eugeniu Sofroni (4 months ago)

I got the EOS-M for 299$ in summer time when the first price drop went to 299$ .... and i got 2 of them, the 20mm lens for the M4/3 costs more than the EOS-M with the 22mm lens ... so that was a no brainer for me.

0 upvotes
Shortie8512
By Shortie8512 (4 months ago)

I think Canon just helped me make the decision to move away and get an OMD EM1.

I shoot underwater with a S90 and with a 450D on land. I want to upgrade both systems, so in an ideal world I'd like a 70D and EOS M but the M just doesn't cut it as you can't use a touchscreen underwater and messing around with menus when shooting manually can be quite fiddly underwater, especially when you are wearing 5mm gloves! I had really high hopes for the M2 so I just hope that a higher spec M is in the pipeline.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (4 months ago)

I can just see all the EOS-M system bashers grinding their teeth in fury now. "But I said the M system was no good. Why didn't Canon listen to me?"

(The M system is not for me, but that's another issue.)

1 upvote
Shortie8512
By Shortie8512 (4 months ago)

The M would be great for me to use (in addition to my dSLR) as I could use all my existing lenses on it so it keeps investment to a minimum. But neither the M or M2 suit my needs as they are totally reliant on touchscreen control and/or menus - there are no dials for aperture, shutter speed etc, or any programmable buttons either.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

"But I said the M system was no good. Why didn't Canon listen to me?"

Actually, Canon still kept EOS M firmly in "no good" territory.

2 upvotes
SRT3lkt
By SRT3lkt (4 months ago)

This camera will receive "least positive comment of the year" award.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

Surpassed many times over by the far more deserving Adobe cloud subscription scheme.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (4 months ago)

The nikon DF got 2000+ comments a large majority negative... so its got a long way to go there

0 upvotes
mattmtl
By mattmtl (4 months ago)

Surely the Hasselblad Lunar is the champ. Did anyone have anything good to say about it? In the archives I see several articles totalling just under 2000 comments, and I'll bet the DF must have had at least a few staunch defenders...

0 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (4 months ago)

Well, during the past 2 weeks I have purchased 2x ESO-M kits complete with FOC EOS lens adapters. These are already being used to shoot PRO videos - and frankly their brilliant - so much better than I had expected. The EOS -M2 - well its a move forward and I'm pleased that the new version hasn't trashed mine - I fully expect Canon to bring out a higher spec version based upon the 70D during 2014. Stand by for the M bashers to record their opinions of where Canon went wrong with their M2 and how its the end for Canon…such nonsense.

7 upvotes
riveredger
By riveredger (4 months ago)

Truth is, all of the latest cameras can produce excellent quality photos (and many can produce great video as well). It's a good time for all of us.

4 upvotes
tabloid
By tabloid (4 months ago)

Nice camera.
Could do with a electronic viewfinder.

Using these type of cameras outside in bright sunlight just doesn't work.

1 upvote
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (4 months ago)

DPR! For a month no major news or test!!! Except a test scene for A7...Do you have anything in your sleeve for December? Hurry up! Thanks, it was a great year, was it? :)

3 upvotes
Segaman
By Segaman (4 months ago)

Yep, would be nice, but i guess they got other fish to fry
Too bad, they are other reviews over the net too

0 upvotes
67gtonr
By 67gtonr (4 months ago)

Tabloid, I have used my EOS M outdoors in the summer in New Mexico without any problems, you seem to not know what you are talking about!

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

I figured it out. In order to fend off mirrorless cameras, Canon has introduced a new system with 3 lenses and a second body that they know nobody will buy, just to prove their boring old SLRs are better. It's an expensive but diabolically clever approach!

8 upvotes
EvokeEmotion
By EvokeEmotion (4 months ago)

Clever indeed. That's why they're making money. Unlike some other camera makers.

5 upvotes
dirtysensor
By dirtysensor (4 months ago)

Sony's imaging division, while smaller revenue than Canon, is on MUCH more stable financial ground. They're getting a nice chunk of profit for every Pentax and Nikon body sold, plus their own business. The A7/A7R is a game changer in the price/performance/size arena, and Sony is going to bring the pain to Canikon.

0 upvotes
DBHH
By DBHH (4 months ago)

Unless you guys have a lot of stock in these camera companies I don't know why you care. Brand rivalry is just as silly as sports team rivalry.

6 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

Sony Semiconductor makes the sensors; it's a separate company from the one that makes the cameras and lenses. Sony's camera division, unlike those at Canon and Nikon, is currently not profitable.

2 upvotes
Segaman
By Segaman (4 months ago)

@dbhh

So true, these guys are so ....... Convinced that they purchased the right brand, and i,m talking most people here at dpreview, this is so sad

5 upvotes
Leandros S
By Leandros S (4 months ago)

I think it's safe to say that brand rivalry has more real economic consequences than sports team rivalry. I think it's good to take an interest and study what's going on - better than playing Farmville, anyhow.

1 upvote
Siddharth
By Siddharth (4 months ago)

Good news for Sony!!!.

Looks like Canon's strategy pundits feel photographers will eventually migrate to video...hence the need to develop DSLRs with better video capability only !!

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

Do you have any idea how big a video file would be if shot raw at say 20MP per frame with say a bit depth of 14 per colour channel?

Yeah, shipping from Canon mid2015, NOT.

There are several APSC mirrorless systems that aren't from Sony--two have better natives lenses than the Sony Nex system. And only one of those uses a Sony sensor.

The full framed Sony mirrorless system is still a bit problematical.

0 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (4 months ago)

According to legend, the acronym EOS was created by Canon to represent the Goddess of Dawn. However, the market failure of the EOS M suggests that EOS stands now for End Of Success…

It seems Canon is starting to lose its commercial magic

5 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (4 months ago)

Wow,, swing and a miss. Based on your astute observations I'm sure this mega corporation that does $25 billion yearly is just going to stop being successful. lol

8 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

I can see commercial magic with something like the Df but when I look at a camera it's not much of a consideration.

1 upvote
6x9
By 6x9 (4 months ago)

I am not convienced... I think that perception of the EOS M (or of any other camera/system) on Japanese market may be quite different comparted to other markets. It is very different mentality.
Also, if you check here on Dpreview how many people actually own the EOS M, you may be quite surprized. This is times more than some "better known" cameras.
The positive thing is - Canon made the market aware of their "M" model. The camera is well built (although it is not without some drawbacks). All three lenses are extremely good - I do not recall seeing any negative feedback. The best advertisement is a word of mouth (and price). People are buying and will keep buying the "M".

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (4 months ago)

"Based on your astute observations I'm sure a mega corporation like Kodak that did $25 billion yearly should not stop being successful. lol"

4 upvotes
riveredger
By riveredger (4 months ago)

The same company whose stock is down 16.8% YTD? The same one whose earnings growth is -7% year over year?

3 upvotes
dpalugyay
By dpalugyay (4 months ago)

Yep someone should tell the king (Canon) that he's not wearing any clothes.

1 upvote
Richard Franiec
By Richard Franiec (4 months ago)

It is funny to see M4/3-NEX crowd relieving themselves from the fear of Canikon large sensor compact not compatible with their countless lenses. No need to chew the fingernails up to the elbows, yet...but this time eventually will come.
On the other hand, the giants might need something to wake them up or break the mold of the same ol', same ol' so let's see the responses as our contribution to the process LOL.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
mattmtl
By mattmtl (4 months ago)

Well, as one of that m43 crowd, I would actually be happy if Canon would offer something really tempting to me. Even if it didn't succeed at luring me, it would at least spur competitors to step up their game.

Instead, Canon offers a timid little system that appears to be deliberately designed to avoid appealing to users of competing systems. Even as someone with a fairly strong commitment to another system, that's disappointing.

4 upvotes
67gtonr
By 67gtonr (4 months ago)

But with the available adapter all Canon EF and EF-S lenses are fully compatible on the EOS M.

0 upvotes
wherearemyshorts
By wherearemyshorts (4 months ago)

Way too little and too late. Should it be called T2?

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Should be called Number 2.

0 upvotes
JamesVo
By JamesVo (4 months ago)

Lots and lots of moaning here. The EOS M2 does not look particularly exciting to me either. However, I think everyone is underestimating the effect of the ubiquitous cellphone camera on sales of compact and intermediate level cameras of all types.

The MIL cameras sit in an uncomfortably narrow niche between the lower end of the DSLR range and the upper end compacts that are really quite good.

I would really like to buy a compact MIL system for the many times when the size and weight of my pro level DSLR gear sees it being left at home. This means a MIL camera and 2 or 3 lenses.....but the prices are generally higher than entry level DSLR kit, the image quality is worse, or at best equivalent and functionality is somewhat reduced. Entry level DSLR kit actually serves me better. No wonder I haven't bought a MIL camera yet.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (4 months ago)

Exciting. Who cares about exciting? It's a camera, not a roller coaster. Find a camera that suits your particular needs and leave exciting to sky diving and bungee jumping. When your own potential is maximized by the tool you choose, that's all the excitement you should need. Anything beyond that is marketing BS that will be fun for a day and then never used again.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
11 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

God bless you, howardroark. Sanity rocks!

1 upvote
Alastair Norcross
By Alastair Norcross (4 months ago)

Sounds like the original M with 2 lenses is exactly what you need. I'm in the same situation. I have the 7D and 7 lenses. I love the camera and lenses, but often don't have it with me, because of size and weight. A couple of weeks ago I bought the M with 22mm and 18-55 lenses and flash for $400. The image quality is as good as, if not better than, the 7D. The size and weight are a fraction of the 7D with even the lightest of my EF lenses. The M isn't an action camera, of course, but that's not the majority of my shooting. I carry the M and 2 lenses with me everywhere (and have the adapter to use any of my EF lenses, if I want), and couldn't be happier. Shooting with the M and superb 22mm pancake is like going back to classic rangefinder days, but better quality, focus, and shooting experience.

6 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (4 months ago)

I LOVE my EOS-M and no one is more shocked than me ! In fact I now have TWO (I shoot two camera pro video set ups) as their cheap as chips and unless you really do expect the speed of a 7D they are simply brilliant. The all metal MADE IN JAPAN body with metal lens reminds me of my days using (real) Nikon's… not the plastic made in China stuff. Its brought the fun back to taking pics… strange - I hated the EOS-M based upon reviews 18 mths ago- its shown me to try for real rather than trial by review alone...22mm f2 on order!

2 upvotes
JamesVo
By JamesVo (4 months ago)

@ howard roark - maybe I should have said "interesting" rather than "exciting" . nothing about the M2 makes me want to buy it
@ Alastair - I deliberately didn't mention that I am a Nikon user so in my case it would be a Nikon 1 (also currently underwhelming in spec compared to their cheaper entry level DSLRs)... However, if I was a Canon shooter the M would be in my sights but is it better/cheaper than the 100D? The biggest problem is I am long sighted and I really need a viewfinder. Composing with a LCD at arm's reach is unsteady and my arms aren't long enough any more ;-)

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (4 months ago)

No surprises here. Canon is wisely selling the camera in Japan and Asia only, since those are the only places where mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras have had any kind of sales success. Unlike the competition, Canon doesn't have to bet the company's future on a camera form factor that has only proven to be commercially successful when they were sold by the millions as small, pocketable and cheap fixed lens P&S. Smartphones own that ground now, and so far, the idea of adding a larger sensor and interchangeable lenses to that point and shoot form factor hasn't paid off for any camera company. If the EOS M cameras ever turn a significant profit for the company, then there will be incentive for further development of that system. Until then, it just makes sense to stick with what works for the overwhelming majority of camera buyers on the planet, and that's Canon's highly profitable line of DSLRs. Business 101. :)

3 upvotes
Resom
By Resom (4 months ago)

Thanks - I didn´t know, that Canon is THAT smart! Wow!

2 upvotes
mattmtl
By mattmtl (4 months ago)

So, why bother with this at all?

If the goal is to compete in the Asian market wouldn't it make sense to have a system that's competitive? As opposed to a system consisting of a single entry-level body (arguably outdated before it left the drawing board) and three lenses?

Even in the "mirrorless is a failure outside Asia" narrative this doesn't make much sense.

3 upvotes
beaconsfield
By beaconsfield (4 months ago)

Actually, in Asia they are going for enormous DSLR cameras even if only to take snapshots. In Seoul, I have seen young girls with Canon DSLR taking street photos with Canon whilte "L" lenses, and those streets are quite narrow. You stand a good chance of getting hit by a 200 mm lens. New found prosperity but without the history.

2 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (4 months ago)

@ mattmtl,
If the idea is to keep size and weight to a minimum in a system with an APS-C sensor body, then a small three lens system should prove to be extremely appealing to that kind of buyer. Also, if such a system doesn't prove to be sales worthy in the market that is most favorable to it, then the company can kill it at minimum loss. Like any other product, its "swim or sink".

1 upvote
bluevellet
By bluevellet (4 months ago)

Last time I checked, the EOS M had a 2% market share in the Japanese mirrorless market. The 3 biggest players in the same market have over 10 times that amount for each of them (toogether, they own over 80% of the market).

"it pays not to compete"

lol

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (4 months ago)

"Canon is wisely selling the camera in Japan and Asia only, since those are the only places where mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras have had any kind of sales success."

Well, even in the US market, still dominated by the DSLR tradition, you can sell mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras IF YOU HAVE A GOOD PRODUCT! The proof is the Sony A7r that in this moment outsells the D800E by a large margin:

Amazon Best Sellers Rank in Camera & Photo
A7r: #826
D800E: #1558

0 upvotes
mattmtl
By mattmtl (4 months ago)

Donnie, no doubt a "small three lens system should prove to be extremely appealing"... my point is that the appeal is likely to be much greater if customers can tailor the system to their needs/preferences by having a variety of bodies and lenses to choose from.

Look at a competing system such as m43, and you can build a compact system with or without EVF, with or without IBIS, with or without silent electronic shutter, with or without articulating screen, with or without battery-grip capability, etc. etc., and you can do it all with pancake primes, or all zooms, or whatever mix you like.

There's no attempt at a one-size-fits-all solution, because one size does not fit all. Canon surely knows this from its SLR business.

And that is why Canon's mirrorless system is lacking. I'm sure the lenses are fine and the body is not bad if it happens to meet your needs, but it's only slightly more of a "system" than the G1-X is.

0 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (4 months ago)

Well...
Then I don't understand why the first model was introduced world wide.
This sounds more like an afterthought to me, leaving out some facts.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

Canon certainly hasn't been much of an innovator lately. It doesn't seem fair to compare them with Microsoft since Canon products work, but at this time of year, when I go into a big box and see the Canon (and Nikon) boxes stacked like cord wood, I figure maybe these guys really do have some idea of what sells and why.

2 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (4 months ago)

thsoe girls pursue IQ over beauty touch up and easy operations so don't count them in. the majority of asian girls just want simple operation, slim design and app that touches up their skin.

look at the success of casio tryx....

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (4 months ago)

If it's designed to be as small as possible, why is it still the mirrorless system camera with the largest kitzoom? Samsung, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic etc., they all offer considerable smaller collapsable kitzooms too.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (4 months ago)

@ mattmtl,
I get your point about multi-choice selection within a system, and for companies like Olympus, Sony, and Panasonic, who don't do DSLRs, that kind of variety within their mirrorless ILC offerings is absolutely critical as a means of expanding their customer base. However, that kind of massive financial commitment has already been invested by Canon into their highly successful EOS DSLR system. The EOS system is so successful that Canon continually finds ways to expand its customer base in ways that its competitors can only dream of. (Think Cinema EOS). Ask yourself, why would Canon create a massive and expensive mirrorless ILC system without first testing the waters to see if there's any long term profit in it? The competition may not have any choice but to chase the hoped for mirrorless revolution. Canon is in an entirely different position altogether. Canon has lots of options.

0 upvotes
mattmtl
By mattmtl (4 months ago)

Sure, focusing on the successful SLR business while only testing the waters in mirrorless makes sense for Canon. I'm with you that far.

However, this seems to me to be testing the waters in such a minimal, timid way as to be almost guaranteed to fail.

It wouldn't take any expensive innovation to provide the option of a second, more capable body:

- accessory port + EVF: can be done with off-the-shelf parts (AFAIK both Olympus and Leica use the same Epson accessory here).

- on-sensor PDAF for better performance with adapted lenses: Canon has this.

- articulated or tilting LCD panel: Canon has done this many times.

I bet that with just those three things, the balance of posts here would swing solidly to praise rather than criticism, assuming a price competitive with comparable m43, NEX, etc. models.

As for lenses, I suppose three after a year isn't a terrible pace. Is there a roadmap? (Honest question)

0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (4 months ago)

@Donnie:
"The competition may not have any choice but to chase the hoped for mirrorless revolution." Last time I checked, Sony makes a kind of SLR camera called SLT so they aren't depending only on mirrorless. Here in Latin America they sell more "SLR" shaped cameras than mirrorless and in US there is a bunch of NEX-FS100 and FS700 being used by several studios.

Still, Canon are lazy right now with their mirrorless incursion. I was expecting to see an admirable competitor to promote manufacturers to step up their games but nope.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

dual12:

I neither own nor use a Canon 5D. Canikon lenses aren't optically good enough for my purposes and I don't care about shooting sports so don't need fast AF. Then none of the 5D bodies can match the best Nikon's best high ISO DSLRs.

However the Canon 5D bodies are still a big deal.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> Canikon lenses aren't optically good enough for my purposes

Hilarious. Let me guess, only the Zeiss Atus deserves a place in your camera bag. lol.

6 upvotes
mjls
By mjls (4 months ago)

High ISO on Nikon, lol.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> High ISO on Nikon, lol.

He's kind of right about high ISO, it's the part about the lenses that sounds so funny considering there are no vendors in all of photography who have as many high-quality, high-grade modern SLR lenses as Canikon.

2 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

I use Spiratone lenses exclusively. Damn the cost; I demand the best.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

marike6:

That's spelled Otus, but other, cheaper, Zeiss lenses are a good bit optically better than anything from Canikon--say the 85mm 1.4.

Good Fuji, Samsung, and Olympus lenses are optically better than anything from Canikon too.

0 upvotes
Alastair Norcross
By Alastair Norcross (4 months ago)

Yes, I can see how Nikon's best high ISO sensor, presumably the one in the D4, is significantly better than Canon's, the one in the 6D. If, by significantly better, we mean maybe half a stop. So, for all of us who absolutely have to shoot our black cats in coal cellars illuminated by one candle thirty feet away, the Canon at ISO thirty gazzillion does have that smidgen more noise than the Nikon at thirty gazzillion. As for the idea that Canon and Nikon lenses aren't optically good enough for your purposes, I can only assume that you are the CIA overlord in charge of reading all our credit card numbers from shots taken from spy satellites several hundred miles up in space. You're right. Neither Canon's Ls nor whatever the Nikon equivalents are are good enough for those purposes.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

mjls,

Clearly you've never used a D3s, D700, or D4, now an optically better Zeiss lens helps with high ISOs on those Nikon bodies. But so too with a Canon body. And it's not like the 5D or 1D X are bad at higher ISOs. (Don't have 6D raws to look at, so can't comment on that newish body.)

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

Alastair:

First Canon's good high ISO body is the 1D X.

Then yep, good Zeiss lenses are significantly better optically than anything from Canikon. So maybe you don't have a good monitor or don't bother to print well. Olympus, Fuji and Samsung all have some optically excellent lenses that shame Canikon too.

I think the NSA has other means of reading CC numbers than wasting resources on a KH satellite.

It's kind of sad to see so many defenders of the optical quality of Nikon and Canon lenses--albeit the optical quality of many Canikon lenses is pretty good and that 1 series 32mm F1.2 is good, not excellent though.

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (4 months ago)

@ mattmtl,
I get your point about multi-choice selection within a system, and for companies like Olympus, Sony, and Panasonic, who don't do DSLRs, that kind of variety within their mirrorless ILC offerings is absolutely critical as a means of expanding their customer base. However, that kind of massive financial commitment has already been invested by Canon into their highly successful EOS DSLR system. The EOS system is so successful that Canon continually finds ways to expand its customer base in ways that its competitors can only dream of. (Think Cinema EOS). Ask yourself, why would Canon create a massive and expensive mirrorless ILC system without first testing the waters to see if there's any long term profit in it? The competition may not have any choice but to chase the hoped for mirrorless revolution. Canon is in an entirely different position altogether. Canon has lots of options.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> Zeiss lenses are a good bit optically better than anything from Canikon--say the 85mm 1.4.

1) Zeiss 85 1.4 is one of their weaker lenses, not nearly as good as the Nikon 85 f/1.4G. Don't believe me, look in DxOMark and Photozone.

2) Second, Canon and Nikon makes every focal lens from UWA zooms, standard zooms, large aperture primes, telephoto zoms and super telephotos. Cosina/Zeiss makes a few overpriced manual focus primes.

3) Samsung, Olympus, Fuji better than anything Canikon?? Now you've gone off your rocker. Software corrected lenses designed for tiny crop sensor better than optically corrected pro-grade Nikkors or L FF lenses? Sure. And I'm going to be the next President of the United States.

4) Where are all these photos of your for which Canikon lenses are not good enough? I can't find photo from you on DPR, but you sure do say a lot. :-)

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

marike6:

The best Fuji, Samsung, and Olympus easily best Canikon.

I've used the Nikon 1.4 85mm it's optically crap compared to the Zeiss 85mm 1.4.

You can pretty much skip DXO lens scoring; it's not quite as bad as the sensor scoring but it's down there next to useless.

I don't for a second dispute that Canikon makes a greater range of lens sizes. Who cares that's got nothing to do with optical quality.

Olympus 4/3 and m4/3 lenses corrected? Um you need to look into things. Good Olympus lenses easily shame Canikon and the best Samsung NX lens plays in Leica M and Zeiss territory. Fuji and Olympus should feel real threatened by the optical quality of that Samsung 85mm F1.4.

So I believe my eyes, and my results.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> I've used the Nikon 1.4 85mm it's optically crap compared to the Zeiss 85mm 1.4.

Sure you have. Photos?

Check DxOMark, Photozone, or Lenstip. You'll see that the Nikon 85 f/1.4G is a much better lens than the Zeiss ZF 85 f/1.4. The ZF 85 softer corners and center than the Nikkor and doesn't get sharp across the frame until f/2.8. Photozone MTFs tell it all.

> Olympus 4/3 and m4/3 lenses corrected?

Olympus m43 lenses use software correction. Fact. They are also designed for the significantly smaller m43 sensor. How hard is it to get sharp borders and corners with that tiny sensor? Let them try designing some optically corrected FF lens. They don't even compete with Canikon with their software corrected lenses for the smaller m43 sensor. They aren't shaming anybody.

> So I believe my eyes, and my results.
What results? Where's your gear list, your gallery photos? If Samsung, Olympus images are embarrassing Canikon, let's see your photos to prove it.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

marike6:

No most Olympus lenses have been engineered so the light hits the sensor dead on across the sensor plane, this is a well known point about Olympus digital camera lenses. This is similar to the system Leica uses for S2 system lenses.

DXO scores are nearly useless for lenses, they can tell if a lens is good, but not extraordinary. So stop quoting them. I won’t claim to be particularly familiar with the other websites.

Yep, I have the photos that prove my point, no I will not share them. You can rent the Zeiss lenses yourself.

I will say that yes Canikon can make a sharp lens–colour aint particularly good though. Too bad Canikon has had years to catch up to good Olympus and Fuji lenses and they’ve wasted their time. Now Fuji and Olympus are both significantly improved and Samsung has entered the market, in one case besting very good Fuji and Olympus lenses.

Instead of expending effort to argue with me, get Canikon to improve those system lenses optical quality.

0 upvotes
KW Phua
By KW Phua (4 months ago)

Because Canon has 100D, the smallest DSLR. They think it may replace EOS M. (Or better sale then EOS M). With 100D you can share with your exiting EF/s lens. You you want really pocketable, S120 or G16/G1x (jacket-able). They will upgrade G1x with better spec first before EOS M. Way to earn money.

0 upvotes
Frank_BR
By Frank_BR (4 months ago)

"It appears that the EOS M2 won't be sold in either the European or US markets".

If that is true, it is a clear indication that Canon lost a lot of money in the US and Europe markets with the EOS M. In other words, these markets rejected categorically the first Canon's attempt to sell a mirrorless camera there.

0 upvotes
gefrorenezeit
By gefrorenezeit (4 months ago)

" In other words, these markets rejected categorically the first Canon's attempt to sell a mirrorless camera there."

And to my eye they wisely did. ;)

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

When a camera does not sell, it's a clear indication that people are not buying it.

2 upvotes
David Rossberg
By David Rossberg (4 months ago)

Canon is determined to make the least interesting mirrorless system.

It seems they hate the whole system and somehow thought the worst possible damage they could do is to launch an inferior camera.

7 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (4 months ago)

looks good
fills intended low end niche (aka: mirrorless low end range, but with aps-c IQ)

people forget this isn't a prosumer product, but strictly a basic level beginner range product for ILC from Canon, a kind of Rebel M in compact form, but BELOW even the PowerShot G/S series, with EOS low end aps-c IQ as a bonus.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (4 months ago)

What?

5 upvotes
Treeshade
By Treeshade (4 months ago)

Low-end beginner mirrorless with APS-C IQ? Are you talking about Sony NEX, or Samsung NX? The lower end of both system have sub-$600 body, acceptable AF, and more than three lens choices.

12 upvotes
kimchiflower
By kimchiflower (4 months ago)

It's amazing how something this beige, dull, and lackluster can generate so many comments!!!

Perhaps this is Canon's genius - any publicity is good publicity.

Or maybe Canon just dropped the ball. Again.

2 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (4 months ago)

Yeah, especially considering it isn't even available outside of Japan and China (DPReview forgot to mention that).

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

Does it come in beige? The first ones are so cheap, I was thinking of getting all the colors. Canon's genius is making good lenses, affordable consumer bodies and generous rebates 2-3 times a year.

0 upvotes
Cihangir Gzey
By Cihangir Gzey (4 months ago)

-Internal flash?
-No, only external flash is available
-NEXXXXTTTT!

0 upvotes
R Thornton
By R Thornton (4 months ago)

Looks like it could have great potential, but the execution seems so uninspiring.
Here's the thing, dear camera manufaturers: Since you want to command spectacular prices, release something spectacular!

1 upvote
Higuel
By Higuel (4 months ago)

...(PART3, and LAST!) TO sell it for at least twice as much the actual price! maybe 350 or 450 €?! ( and God forgive us to think about a good APS 30mm f1.4 like Sigma!!! It would go for some 800€!!! x_X Don't think so? just wait and we will see it in next year!!! ):(

Please do keep bringing us truly amazing optically tele-lenses that cost way more then any mortal can afford! But make it even more so: something like a new 100-400 IS L for 4000€ minimum!!! Why settle for the old price? lets just keep the latest fashion and sell it for at least twice as much as the one before!!!

Sincerely, your long term Disappointed client!

Henrique

PS: what kind of flowers would you like in 8years?
PS2: Thanks for reading!

1 upvote
ronny hermans
By ronny hermans (4 months ago)

Sorry to say, but I think they are not listening.

1 upvote
Higuel
By Higuel (4 months ago)

... (PART2) the others! I do Love competition since it truly is the best way for evolution, who knows, if you are still in business in 5 or 8years(u should read the very recent study that hints about Mr Nikon disappearing in 5Years-and they AWAKE and are MUCH MORE proactive then you and always coming with WAY BETTER AND WAY CHEAPER CAMERAS for the last 2 or 3years!!!) we might start seeing REALLY new and revolutionary cameras AND lenses from you like you did so well in the 80s&90s!

PS: when u finally wake up and make an 50mm f1.8 don't forget to try and sell it for some ridiculous amount like 500€!
Also, when finally you make an EF-S 30mm f1.8 (like nikon did many MANY years ago!) make it even worst build then the sweet 50mm f1.8II (that is how u evolved it before!), maybe make it in paper or already pre-fractured plastic! (mine broke the tiny plastic hooks that held in place the main lens group!!! UNBELIEVABLE!!!) IT'S ALL PLASTIC INSIDE!!! And...
Don't forget to... (end of part2)

1 upvote
Higuel
By Higuel (4 months ago)

Dear Canon, i am a user of ur cameras since film times in 1995, and i still am. Your attitude of lack of real development and advance in last years (since you got comfortable in the top of the sales pyramid year after year!) made me question my choice several times, i was however, like so many many others bound by my lenses in your bayonet! (even if most were from TRULY EXCELLENT Sigma APO and EX series!).
however, and lots of people agree with me on this, (and i remember even some friend with the amazing nikon 800 who feel exactly the same and bough a tiny NICE micro 4/3 last month!).
In any case, don't worry too much Mr canon, we will not stop having Amazing new cameras and REALLY evolutionary equipment, just like Olympus did with their very last "reflex" and their amazing f2.0 zooms! Or Sigma did with incredible 18-35 f1.8 Lens! or even Mr Sony with their very own and world first mirrorless full frame camera!!!
So keep up the BAD work! and just make life easier for... (END PART1)

3 upvotes
Summi Luchs
By Summi Luchs (4 months ago)

Even if > 400 comments are much for a camera not available in North America and Europe I feel that I read too much bashing here. With the EOS-M Canon did half of the things wrong, but half right. Indeed I considered to buy into the EOS-M system before I went with m4/3. The EOS-M uses a proven sensor that satisfies most EOS DSLR users. Sony has slightly better sensors and higher end camera bodies, but most of its lenses are either mediocre or expensive. Canon managed to produce very good AND affordable lenses for the EOS-M. But only three. And here is where the good side of the story ends. I expected that Canon would quickly develop a more comprehensive lens lineup and a higher end body (with EVF and more controls). But time has shown they didn't. So they make a niche product from a potentially good concept.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (4 months ago)

Whereas most Canon lenses are non existent...
( I kinda wish you open up the adapter door here ... :-) )

1 upvote
pdelux
By pdelux (4 months ago)

canon have ridden the wave of their reputation for a long time. but how will it last when they keep releasing lack luster products.....

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> canon have ridden the wave of their reputation for a long time

5D III, 6D, 70D, 100D, 24-70 f/2.8 L, 40 f/2.8, 35 f/2 IS, C100, et al

There is nothing lack luster about any of the above products.

People seeking small MILCs for walking around or travel are but a tiny percentage of the overall camera market. Canon understands this.

6 upvotes
dual12
By dual12 (4 months ago)

marike6, there is nothing special about any of those products either. I could get something similar or better from at least 2-3 other manufacturers. Don't kid yourself.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> marike6, there is nothing special about any of those products either

I'm not a Canon user, but "lack luster"? How ridiculous. Who's kidding who? You are talking about Gold Award cameras in the 5DIII, 70D, 100D, and outstanding, class leading optics in above the lenses. The EOS Cinema line, not only did it beat Sony to the punch for offering 4K RAW, but it's one of THE premier run and gun documentary or high end wedding cinema camera systems available.

As far as other manufacturers, no other vendor but Nikon offers anywhere near as complete as SLR system as Canon does.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

dual12:

There's "nothing special" about the Canon 5D series DSLRs. Are you not familiar with still digital photography?

0 upvotes
dual12
By dual12 (4 months ago)

I guess I shouldn't have expected Canon fanboys to recognize that Canon has been selling them old, obsolete sensor technology for the last 5 years.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (4 months ago)

dual12:

I neither own nor use a Canon 5D. Canikon lenses aren't optically good enough for my purposes and I don't care about shooting sports so don't need fast AF. Then none of the 5D bodies can match the best Nikon's best high ISO DSLRs.

However the Canon 5D bodies are still a big deal.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> I guess I shouldn't have expected Canon fanboys

Pulling out the "fanboy" card because you have no answers aside, I'm not a Canon user but it's just foolish to think that they make lack luster gear when they are a market leader. You cannot name one vendor other than Nikon who has anywhere near the SLR system that Canon offers. Their sensor technology is far from obsolete, in fact it's good enough to have a number of cameras near the top of DxOMark's sensor ratings. Sensor technology does not make us better photographer or help us book more weddings or portraits. Professionals and amateurs all over the world use Canon gear to create all kinds of award winning work. Who is kidding who?

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

It may not be much of an innovation but I happen to think my 17TS lens is the best one on the market. It's even better than Nikon's 17mm PC-E.

0 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (4 months ago)

For Every "good" product canon releases (lets say 5D3) there are about 5 "lack luster" pieces of crap such as 2 EOS-Ms made to protect their "good" products. Hey maybe thats good business (i dont know anything about business)

We all remember when KODAK was king and how quickly they fell.

0 upvotes
Peter Bendheim
By Peter Bendheim (4 months ago)

The EOS-M in it's current form with the firmware upgrade is a surprisingly nice little camera to use. It's really small with the pancake lens, absolutely solid build that is all magnesium alloy, a tempered glass LCD and pretty good image quality. I like it's ergonomic simplicity, it's easy to use, the lenses are metal bodied, and the IQ is great. The pancake lens is razor sharp, for example. Really as good as anyone could wish for. It would be nice if it had a viewfinder that one could attach. It's also a refreshing design break from all the fake retro, fake leather, Leica look a-likes, and other gimmicks.
Hate it as much as you like, folks, especially those of you that have never tried it, but it occupies a deserved place in my camera bag along with the bigger and flashier gear, and has produced images I am very happy with and that form part of my portfolio. I'm sure Canon will eventually produce a more pro model, but this camera isn't half as bad as most of you would like it to be.

7 upvotes
6x9
By 6x9 (4 months ago)

EOS M is an excellent camera taking into account its current price. It is not perfect, but I do not see any point to complain.
Still the new M2 does nor seem to make any sense. However, it probably makes some sense for Japanese market, since it has been released only there.

2 upvotes
djrocks66
By djrocks66 (4 months ago)

I agree with that. I picked up the M with the 22mm real cheap when the price dropped some time ago and it is a nice little camera. If it had focus peaking ( Not Magic Lantern ), a built in flash ( even a small one just for fill), and the ability to turn off the touch screen completely it would be almost perfect for me. I keep enabling the touch screen by accident and it drives me nuts. :)

1 upvote
bdbender4
By bdbender4 (4 months ago)

I wonder how many people who comment here actually own or have used the EOS-M. I love mine, for three hundred dollars it is the bargain of the year. I keep the 22mm lens on it and the images are great. Sure, I wish it focused faster and that it had an EVF, but it is mostly what I grab these days when I just want a camera along. I was hoping that the version 2 would have the 70 sensor in it, that might have been interesting. Oh well.

3 upvotes
EvokeEmotion
By EvokeEmotion (4 months ago)

"I wonder how many people who comment here actually own or have used the EOS-M."

Most of these folks are m43 fanboys, if you look at their posting history you'll see. The one thing I know about them is that they spend an awfully large amount of time attacking and mocking other camera brands and types.

They hate FFs (Nikon and Canon), anything Sony, Fuji, etc. And of course the EOS M. Really immature and childish, really.

Most telling is, when you look at forums of the other cameras, members there hardly ever mention the m43 system, let alone flame them all the time. It just feels like the m43 fanboys are compensating for something.

3 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (4 months ago)

I now have TWO EOS-M's and I love using them. My Canon DLSR's are gathering dust - theM's are that good….22mm f2 on order...

2 upvotes
Jostian
By Jostian (4 months ago)

still no built in flash... hate the fiddly flash add on's. No thanks, carry a flash separately defeats the purpose of a CMC...

1 upvote
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

People often say that large size and add-ons defeat the purpose of mirrorless cameras, as if their purpose is to be as small as possible.
I always thought that the purpose of any camera, with or without mirror, is to take photographs. An add-on flash doesn't defeat that purpose.

4 upvotes
pannumon
By pannumon (4 months ago)

This is Canon saying to their loyal customers that "you cannot live without PDAF" and that "mirrorless system cameras are toys".

This is partly true: If you MUST have a Canon and you want to be even a little serious, then you need to use PDAF because Canon CDAF is absolutely TERRIBLE, and you need to get a DSLR, because Canon mirrorless system cameras ARE toys.

6 upvotes
Thorgrem
By Thorgrem (4 months ago)

Canon lovers keep saying that Mirrorless isn't successful outside Asia. The fact is that Olympus, Fuji, Panasonic and Sony have gained marketshare all over the world. Never before in the digital age there marketshare for system camera's was so big. Canikon together lost marketshare in the last 5 years.

5 upvotes
tokugawa
By tokugawa (4 months ago)

Im a Canon lover and I like mirrorless, and Im not even in Asia. I own a Canon system with a full complement of lenses, and also a Olympus E-PL5 which I love too.

I think Canon should really have put more effort into mirrorless.

4 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (4 months ago)

Mirrorless is not a success. Sales have been flat for about two years now with the exception of the three months leading up to last year's holiday season where it peaked at 600k units/month. While worldwide sales have been around 200k per month and probably averaging about 300k, DSLR sales peaked at 1.6M and bottomed out at 800k per month, averaging around 1.4M. So on their worst month DSLR sales did 200k better than ILC on their best month. Since that dip in sales, DSLR number have been growing by about 200k per month. Let's say that again in a different way: since a sales drop at the beginning of this year DSLR sales have been increasing every month by the same amount that ILC continues to sell on a monthly basis with virtually zero growth. That is not a success story for ILC sales.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
cinemascope
By cinemascope (4 months ago)

It's a Trojan horse... ssshhhhh....

0 upvotes
Total comments: 616
12345