Previous news story    Next news story

Just posted: Hands-on preview of the Canon EOS 100D/SL1

By dpreview staff on Mar 21, 2013 at 05:00 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $499.008 deals

We've just posted a hands-on preview of the Canon EOS 100D/Rebel SL1. Distinguished by its impressively small form factor, the 100D's 18MP CMOS sensor, 3" touchscreen LCD and 1080p30 video resolution will be familiar to followers of the Rebel series. Canon's hybrid phase/contrast detect AF system has been tweaked, however, to provide much greater scene coverage. Has Canon managed to maintain its customary handling experience in the smallest DSLR it has ever made? Click on the link below to read our preview and find out.

229
I own it
87
I want it
37
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 379
123
jm67
By jm67 (Mar 21, 2013)

Well, it's not for me by a long shot but I still dont' get the point of it. I'm sure someone out there will love it but I think it's a waste of the Earth's natural resources.

3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Mar 21, 2013)

What camera isn't a waste of natural resources? Do you have any reason to believe you aren't a waste of natural resources? What is this, a piano?

3 upvotes
jm67
By jm67 (Mar 21, 2013)

Some cameras are more useful than others. I (unlike some) fail to see how this fills an unfilled niche. Am I somehow not allowed to have a personal opinion now on how useful I find a camera? And no, it's not a piano. ??? Go attack someone else who thinks this camera is a waste of time.

2 upvotes
bmcdon
By bmcdon (Mar 21, 2013)

Relax howard. No one's allowed to not like this camera? Millions will like it. Some won't. The camera world goes on.

0 upvotes
fucile
By fucile (Mar 23, 2013)

It's smaller, and actually uses(wastes) LESS of the Earth's resources than the larger cameras that you prefer.

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Mar 21, 2013)

Well, as a Nikon user I have a couple of words to say: it will sell a lot. The people writing here don't have a clue about markets. Canon sells 7 million dslrs and gazillions of compacts and they don't have a clue? LOL!

12 upvotes
quangzizi
By quangzizi (Mar 22, 2013)

That does not make it a good camera. This is not an economic forum. In the long run I can see this hurt the Canon's government. Too much government spending on craps that will lead to no where.

1 upvote
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Mar 21, 2013)

Well, I am not surprised at all ! The appearance of bizzare, halfcrippled, monstruous creatures like EOS M, 700D and 100D correlates well with general impression left by this interview: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0336328811/cp-2013-interview-with-canons-masaya-maeda

It all speaks a clear message that boils down to single word: cluelessness.

It's hard to believe it is the same company that designed the 10D-40D line of cameras.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 21, 2013)

Making a DSLR smaller doesn't make it more usable. Chopping off the grip may appeal to m43 fans, who seem to believe that ALL cameras should be miniature because it's just too hard, too much effort to carry a normal sized camera, but it won't make the camera easier to shoot with, or balance better with telephoto lenses. It is much, much more tiring to shoot with a camera that has no grip. So I'm hoping this trend towards miniaturization ends soon.

As far as the sensor, it's strange that Nikon used the 16 mp Exmor in the D7000/D5100 for one release cycle and it was class leading for DR, color depth and ISO. Canon has this mediocre 18 mp sensor and they are using it over, and over, and over again. Go figure.

All that said, this camera actually looks pretty interesting, and at least it has a nice LCD and an OVF. If it had a slightly better sensor, it would be more compelling.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
Chris Flowers
By Chris Flowers (Mar 21, 2013)

I've read that's a brand new 18mp sensor...

0 upvotes
Anepo
By Anepo (Mar 21, 2013)

You seem to fail to see the reason why m43 users get an m43 system, carrying a DSLR is NOT hard, it is LESS descrete & a micro four thirds is BETTER for street photography, as well as it is aimed at those who want to travel LIGHT and yet retain good image quality, beside the fact the OMD E-M5 has got a BETTER sensor than the 550D, 600D AND 650D, this 700D? its the same sensor so guess who will be better? here is a hint: It will NOT be the Canon.

6 upvotes
David Naylor
By David Naylor (Mar 21, 2013)

If it really was a new 18 MP sensor, Canon & DPreview would tell us so.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Mar 21, 2013)

There *are* m43 cameras with a grip.

2 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Mar 21, 2013)

marike6,

If by better sensor you mean more pixels, then I have to disagree with you. 18mp are more than enough to do anything that a typical buyer of this class of DSLR might want to do with the files from this camera. Aside from bragging rights, more pixels are of little benefit to the user who rarely prints anything larger than 8x10.

2 upvotes
Chris Flowers
By Chris Flowers (Mar 21, 2013)

@David Naylor: it's mentioned on Product annoucement... "It features a newly developed 18.0- megapixel CMOS (APS-C) sensor and high-performance DIGIC 5 Image Processor for exceptional image quality and speed"

0 upvotes
Jorginho
By Jorginho (Mar 21, 2013)

Yes...ALL m43 fans are like this which is why no one understand the GH3 I have been told 0 copies are sold currently. Thx for clearing that up for us.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 21, 2013)

@Donnie G

No I'm talking about sensor technology. The Canon sensors simply have not been competitive with the Sony and Toshiba sensors found in the Nikon, Sony and Pentax DSLRs.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Mar 21, 2013)

@Donnie G

It is not just megapixels. The sensors in Nikon's cameras have better color depth, and dynamic range as well. In the case of the DR it is by a very significant amount. The sensors in Nikon's current cameras out preform the sensors in Canon's current cameras in every way.

0 upvotes
ericsan
By ericsan (Mar 21, 2013)

If there is no roadmap for smaller lenses to go along with this "baby DSLR", this brand new camera is USELESS !!

4 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Mar 21, 2013)

The Sony NEX doesn't have small lenses, and that hasn't stopped people from buying it. Canon has more available lenses, and higher quality lenses.

1 upvote
Just Having Fun
By Just Having Fun (Mar 21, 2013)

NEX doesn't have many native large lenses either. Any native primes over 50mm? No. Any zooms over 210mm? No. Any zooms longer than 55mm that don't end with F/6.3?

3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Mar 22, 2013)

"The Sony NEX doesn't have small lenses"

You obviously haven't seen their 16-50/3.5-5.6 powerzoom, and 16 and 20 mm primes, right? Compare to the Canon's kit zoom, which is larger and heavier than before, despite not having powerzoom, not having real wide angle (18mm is 29mm eq on Canon, pathetic compared to 24mm) and being all-plastic.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
123Mike
By 123Mike (Mar 21, 2013)

No flippy screen. 30p video only. AF video still way below what the Sony SLTs have offered for years now.

7 upvotes
Just Having Fun
By Just Having Fun (Mar 21, 2013)

But this is an SL1 not an SLt. No one will be confused. :)

1 upvote
Guy Grace
By Guy Grace (Mar 21, 2013)

nice!

0 upvotes
Provia_fan
By Provia_fan (Mar 21, 2013)

Im not saying that this is a bad camera at all, if not at least because it hasn't been reviewed and I haven't handled it myself,but this is what happens when you rest on your laurels for too long.You run out of steam & ideas and now you have companies which were underdogs coming up with the real innovations (i.e. Sony,Fujifilm,Panasonic,Olympus,etc).There's nothing at first,really enticing to this camera or even their EOS M(I rarely see an EOS M on the street, I see Sony, Olys and Panasonics and increasingly more often lots of Fujifilm X cameras).
Canon should have learned by now, not to rest on their laurels.How many more incarnations of the 18MP sensor are we gonna see. Im not a pixel chaser by any means,but you got to admit that Sony for example has the upper hand with their NEX-7 24MP APS-C sensor and even Fujifilm X-Trans sensor seem to be able to outresolve the results we came to expect from Canon's 18MP sensor which is on it's 2nd (3rd?) incarnation at thie entry level segment.

1 upvote
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Mar 21, 2013)

I can't say anything positive about this so I just won't say anything at all.

8 upvotes
Anepo
By Anepo (Mar 21, 2013)

To be fair I can say something positive, it has got a built in flash.... but so do 90% of cameras hahaha.

0 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 21, 2013)

another forgettable gray plastic box from Canon - why do they bother?

0 upvotes
acidic
By acidic (Mar 21, 2013)

because they make money from such gray plastic boxes.

1 upvote
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 22, 2013)

I do not deny that this will be commercially successful product, it's their lowest dSLR. But wouldn't it be nice if Canon actually release something that would make you want it, something that will make you say 'wow, this is really cool'.

0 upvotes
john m flores
By john m flores (Mar 21, 2013)

So can someone buy a smaller camera bag if they get the SL1 versus the T5i? If not, then what's the point?

1 upvote
nkarasev
By nkarasev (Mar 21, 2013)

I think canon misses the whole point of small cameras with this one: small camera needs small lens. As in "pancake". Not zoom, that outweighs and outsizes the camera itself.
Ok, one might get pancake to put onto that camera, but seriously, how many buyers does canon expect for this super-budget minded camera and a pancake?
Most users will get the camera and kit zoom which already misses the point of buying camera this small, and no additional lenses!

Nik

1 upvote
Cipher
By Cipher (Mar 21, 2013)

Exactly. Your average consumer will NOT buy a pancake lens. They will want a zoom lens. Either they'll get one with a kit or use one they already own. Suddenly the Canon SL1 is back to bulky.

1 upvote
HBowman
By HBowman (Mar 21, 2013)

I really fail to understand some brands, even though we are in 2013. Canon and Nikon gone nuts (or wild but this is not my problem).

1 upvote
Just Having Fun
By Just Having Fun (Mar 21, 2013)

Hey tkbslc, you messed up on your lens comparison. I fixed it for you.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#289.95,448.27,ha,t

0 upvotes
Paul Farace
By Paul Farace (Mar 21, 2013)

Aside from the small improvements in tech features, the point of this seems to be the small size... but it's not that much smaller than other Rebels... you can't make it much smaller than it is without eliminating buttons and the large screen. So why bother? Maybe Asians feel the Rebels are "too big" but my (hammy fully grown Occidental) adult hands find the current T4i on the boarderline too small as it is! So unless there are legions of skinny small-handed photogs clamoring for smaller bodies... I can't see how this is going to bring more market share to Canon. Good luck to them in any case, I'm invested in them rather deeply.

0 upvotes
Clear as Crystal
By Clear as Crystal (Mar 21, 2013)

Does no one else think this may be a minor upgrade just to get numbering system lined up for marketing? 700D, 70D, 7DII? Then the 600 gets removed leaving the 100 in its place (7000D being too like the Nikon D7000). From my point of view (an amateur) I always found it strange that the Nikon D7000 series had a numbering system which seems to suggest an earlier generation than the 3000 and 5000 series.

I know its not true but to a amateur who walks into a shop it could put them off buying the more expensive camera in favour of one which appears to be a newer generation if they lack the background knowledge to know better.

SORRY, SHOULD HAVE POSTED THIS ON THE 700D COMMENTS

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
BlueBomberTurbo
By BlueBomberTurbo (Mar 22, 2013)

Nikon ran out of numbers:

Low end consumer: D40/X
Midrange consumer: D50, D60, D70/s, D80, D90
High end consumer: D100, D200, D300/s

The D90 was the last double digit camera to be released, so the D3000 and D5000 were released after. Add to that a longer than usual D7000 cycle (closer to high end consumer and some full frame) and shorter D3000 cycle (D40 was a better camera), and things get misaligned. With the previous release pace, the D7200 would have been released around the end of this year, but now it's at least 2 years away.

Makes you wonder why they didn't start the low end or midrange with D10. They had a D1 and D100, after all...

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Mar 21, 2013)

I'm seriously not understanding why people are comparing this APS-C camera to m4/3.

m4/3 still has serious bokeh issues: too much depth of field even with large apertures. Unless you go off-piste, you can't get a normal lens with any kind of decent ability to obliterate the background. And no, I don't want t a Nokton 25/.95, or whatever it's called. APS-C isn;t as great as FF of course, but it's still workable.

You also don't get Canon's bokeh king zooms. I looked at other systems and either they have not enough OOF bokeh or like Sony and Nikon they have have poor bokeh zooms.

There is no system out there that does what Canon APS-C cameras do.

Of course, if you don't care for such a thing as very limited bokeh then it's a non-issue, but it's still an issue for the rest of us and so it's not correct to directly compare this system to m4/3. There is no direct comparison (yet).

1 upvote
chlamchowder
By chlamchowder (Mar 21, 2013)

Sony/Nikon don't have poor bokeh zooms. The Minolta 70-210/4 offers some really nice bokeh for a pretty low price. With Nikon, the 80-200/2.8 or 70-200/2.8 zooms have nine bladed apertures and very nice bokeh too. Within every system, there are zooms with good bokeh, and zooms with poor bokeh.
I also don't see what Canon's APS-C system does that other systems don't. If anything, Canon's APS-C system stands out in having 2009-era sensor technology, while everyone else has moved on.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 21, 2013)

"There is no system out there that does what Canon APS-C cameras do."

Yes, Canon does hold the record for most consecutive bodies with the same 18 mp sensor.

9 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Mar 21, 2013)

You don't seem to know what you're talking about.

12mm f/2, 17mm f/1.8, 20mm f/1.7 produce more OOF bokeh than any equivalent lens you can put on an APS-C Nikon or Canon. Canon APS-C is terrible. There's no decent lenses on the wide end at all. On the long end any system will produce decent bokeh. Go educate yourself.

9 upvotes
Just Having Fun
By Just Having Fun (Mar 21, 2013)

The "too much depth of field " argument died a few years ago when SW like Alien Bokeh 2 came out. Being able to customize bokeh in post and not gambling with PDAF focusing issues is the better way to go.

2 upvotes
Cane
By Cane (Mar 21, 2013)

So you are going to buy one of Canon's big bokeh king zooms and then this cheapo body to mount them on? LOL. People buying this camera are going to use a kit lens. Also, who would someone buy a really small camera and what amounts to a telescope on the front of it? Does Canon give you a Sherpa to carry your bokeh monster?

1 upvote
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Mar 21, 2013)

Those are not very wide lenses (m4/3) and they produce almost no OOF bokeh. Canon's wide lenses produce a lot more even much wider.

Or am I missing some kind of joke here?

A 35mm f1.4 on APS-C is not the 'long end', but rather a normal, and it produces way more bokeh then any normal OEM lens on m4/3.

1 upvote
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Mar 21, 2013)

"So you are going to buy one of Canon's big bokeh king zooms and then this cheapo body to mount them on? LOL. People buying this camera are going to use a kit lens. Also, who would someone buy a really small camera and what amounts to a telescope on the front of it?"

Sure why not. Even mirrorless kit zooms dwarf their cameras. If I were getting this camera (which I'm not) I would definitely be wanting a bigger zoom, but also have a body I can put a small prime on to for other times.

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Mar 21, 2013)

"Sony/Nikon don't have poor bokeh zooms."

Well, bokeh being so subjective all I can say is that I think their bokeh stinks and you don't.

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Mar 21, 2013)

"The "too much depth of field " argument died a few years ago "

It may have died for you but not for the rest of us.

1 upvote
acidic
By acidic (Mar 21, 2013)

You don't understand what bokeh means. Bokeh is subjective quality, not something there is too much of or too little of.

You're obviously referring to depth of field, which bokeh is NOT inversely related to.

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Mar 21, 2013)

I thought I implied what I meant at the beginning. I mean both. And 'Bokeh' is often used interchangeably for OOF (and not DOF), even if technically it means quality of OOF.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jorginho
By Jorginho (Mar 21, 2013)

Correct. I neevr understand APS-c users btw with those DOF issues. I only use FF but lately MF because of the same issues btw.

0 upvotes
quangzizi
By quangzizi (Mar 22, 2013)

You talked about bokeh and DOF as if they are the only things to choose cameras on. Get out of your room and see the world. There are people with various needs and they will choose whatever they want. Therefore they will compare things differently.

Even in term of bokeh, The problem with many of your Canon " bokeh" king zooms and even primes is that they are soft wide open and therefore have to step down to get the best juice out of them. For MFT, it is certainly easier to make the lens perfect wide open. Certainly 70-200II is the best for its class, but then it is too damn big. Now you see why people compare right?

"There is no system out there that does what Canon APS-C cameras do."

Please...really???

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Mar 22, 2013)

"You talked about bokeh and DOF as if they are the only things to choose cameras on"

I did not.

"Even in term of bokeh, The problem with many of your Canon " bokeh" king zooms and even primes is that they are soft wide open and therefore have to step down to get the best juice out of them. "

Sure, and they still wipe-out the m4/3 competition. In anycase their softness wide-open is not that bad. And the new 24-70 II is not soft.

0 upvotes
haiiyaa
By haiiyaa (Mar 21, 2013)

Canon's logic is small dslr with huge lenses to compete with the mirrorless
http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/7419/65157941.jpg

5 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Mar 21, 2013)

That pic actually made me laugh!

By the same token though, you can adapt older telephoto lenses to mirrorless cams and add size. ;)

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
AkinaC
By AkinaC (Mar 21, 2013)

get what you mean, but the focal length is way different....

0 upvotes
Franka T.L.
By Franka T.L. (Mar 21, 2013)

I really do not see the point here ... OK I can relay to the traditional OVF + MIRROR BOX layout but even with that, there is numerous form factor and design cue one can try or fashion to made a petit DSLR. Old Focaflex is one way. Minolta Vectis and Olympus Pen-F shown other way to do it, Even Canon itself done the EOS-ix back then and its still way better than this

Just keep trying to scale down the same mold just do not work

0 upvotes
Woodlink
By Woodlink (Mar 21, 2013)

Steve Jobs would punch the Canon CEO in the mouth over this camera.

Canon seems content to completely disregard the "technical vectors that are on the upswing", as Jobs used to put it, and instead continue down the road of less innovation.

0 upvotes
Cane
By Cane (Mar 21, 2013)

LOL. Canon CEO's wouldn't finish out the week if they were hired at Apple.

0 upvotes
Anepo
By Anepo (Mar 21, 2013)

Steve Jobs was incompetent at anything but marketing and there has been NO innovation for YEARS at apple. They have NOT invented anything for over TEN YEARS!

3 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (Mar 21, 2013)

Sheep

2 upvotes
Ed_arizona
By Ed_arizona (Mar 21, 2013)

canon sheep will buy

0 upvotes
Winston Loo
By Winston Loo (Mar 21, 2013)

just look at this and tell me that Canon's strategy makes any sense?

http://camerasize.com/compact/#289.96,448.134,ha,t

A comparison of equivalent lenses (18-36mm equiv):
Olympus E-M5 + Olympus 9-18mm f/4-5.6 -- 555g Filter size 52mm
Canon 100D + Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 - - 1077g Filter size 82mm
And the Olympus lens is slightly faster! but has no hood.

3 upvotes
MichaelKJ
By MichaelKJ (Mar 21, 2013)

Looks to me like this is just one part of their strategy to gain small ILC market share. They will compete with their brand name recognition & marketing muscle and superior AF for moving subjects. This camera isn't aimed at those who want a 9-18. It is aimed at the average P&S upgrader who will never own more than one or two zoom lenses. I expect them to emphasize the fact that the 18-55 only weighs 7 oz.

4 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 21, 2013)

Could you have possibly picked a more ridiculous lens comparison? I'm not sure.

How about this one?

http://camerasize.com/compact/#289.33,448.27,ha,t

4 upvotes
Jerodequin
By Jerodequin (Mar 22, 2013)

Ooh we could all do this all day couldn't we?!

How about this one?

http://camerasize.com/compact/#289.335,448.23,ha,t

1 upvote
Nappe1
By Nappe1 (Mar 21, 2013)

Hey, APS-C cameras do get smaller.
This is exactly same size (13mm less wide, but 17mm more thick) as Olympus E-420, which happened in March 2008.

Probably the E-4x0 series are the reason why they need to subnote it being smallest _APS-C_ sensored camera, as the total volume of Oly competition is actually tiny bit of smaller... :)

While E-4x0 had and still has it's fans, somehow I see this to be targeted against the mirrorless stuff and can't be that sure if it holds the competition much.

4 upvotes
Cane
By Cane (Mar 21, 2013)

What happens to it's size when you mount one of lens thingies on it?

1 upvote
RobbGee
By RobbGee (Mar 22, 2013)

Good points, Cane & Nappel1

But its not just the lens. Some m4/3rds cameras have external battery units, you and I would say handgrips...and some dSLR designed flashguns.

My E-420 is used with an Oly fl-20 flashgun so both are really small and in keeping with miniturisation.

Illogically, the Canon label will sell this camera by the truck load and yes it is targeting mirrorless ILCs.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 21, 2013)

Pana thinks it could make more money with a camera that is excessively big. Canon thinks the opposite. I think Nikon should be able to do slightly better because the infamous F-mount's throat size is smaller.

0 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (Mar 21, 2013)

Nikon thinks it can make more money with dirt all over the sensor.

0 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (Mar 21, 2013)

Excellent, just what the world needs, another small black camera losing the inherent advantages of its format (ergonomics) whilst still have to mount large lenses on it, way to go Canon, let me guess, it was a friday afternoon and you only had a cigarette packet to write on ?

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
13 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Mar 21, 2013)

>small black camera losing the inherent advantages of its format (ergonomics)

Not really, you still get PDAF via a separate autofocus sensor and an optical viewfinder.

1 upvote
57even
By 57even (Mar 21, 2013)

PDAF is not a panacea, it's only as accurate as the camera's manufacturing tolerances and only as fast as the lens. CDAF works directly off the sensor, so it's always accurate.

The only advantage they have is with moving subjects, but this advantage is pretty slim with low end SLRs, low spec AF systems and kit lenses. PDAF is also starting to emerge on CSC models now, so this advantage wont last forever either.

Would I buy into an SLR system now? Probably not. I have built up a substantial investment in Nikon gear over the years and use it for gigs, events, sport, airshows etc. But it looks ridiculously clumsy beside any CSC camera. When Fuji make some longer lenses and introduce PDAF on sensor, it's going to be harder to justify owning both a CSC and a D600, and it won't be the SLR I keep. The quality difference in A2 prints is already marginal.

3 upvotes
BeanyPic
By BeanyPic (Mar 21, 2013)

When will people realise the Pixel war is over. 18mp is great on an APS-C size sensor. It's only the consumer lead brands that try to fool the public that you need more holes on your sensor. At least Canon brings out a product that does what it say's on the tin and doesn't do what higher spec toys scream and shout about.
I'll stick to an actual camera brand and not brands who buy, re-brand and license technology names to themselves.

2 upvotes
Anepo
By Anepo (Mar 21, 2013)

I don't know, the D3200 seems to be ahead of Canon's and has BETTER noise performance with they're 24 megapixel D3200.

0 upvotes
Photato
By Photato (Mar 21, 2013)

Without mini lenses is kind of pointless the effort to make it small.
Would have been nice to have a 22mm pancake to go with this, like the EOS-M has.
The only really small lens, the 40mm pancake, doesn't cut it for the EF-S bodies like this one for general photography.

Too bad Canon decided to remain stagnant with the sensor. I was expecting them to start moving towards larger pixels.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Mar 21, 2013)

It's a small body because most amateur photogs prefer something small despite it makes no sense for the reason you mentioned.
The same statement is valid for many mirrorless systems as well. Small body + standard size lens = makes no sense.

But if it sells well ... who cares.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Mar 21, 2013)

It's not practical to have a fast "normal" pancake (approx 40mm-50mm equiv) on a DSLR mount due to the extra flange distance, that's why the only pancakes you see on DSLRs are around 40mm and not that fast.

1 upvote
Robert Deutsch
By Robert Deutsch (Mar 21, 2013)

What Canon needs is an APS-C equivalent of the Panasonic 14-42X. The fact that they haven't come out with one suggest that there are major technical obstacles to the production of lens of this sort for the APS-C sensor size, and, as you point out, a 40mm pancake just doesn't cut it. And once you put something like a 24-105L IS (or a 100-400L IS!) on the camera, any benefits of a Honey-I-Shrunk-the-Rebel body are moot. The 100D will still sell well, but more for the traditional entry-level DSLR (i.e., Rebel) market rather than the m4/3 market, once people realize that there is little benefit to having a small body if you still have to use big/heavy lenses.

Bob

1 upvote
Mark B.
By Mark B. (Mar 21, 2013)

It's still an APS-C sensor, so the lenses can't be smaller than EF-S.

0 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (Mar 21, 2013)

A Nikon version of this would be nice though combined with a 35mm f/1.8.

2 upvotes
Cane
By Cane (Mar 21, 2013)

Andy Crowe, Pentax would like a word with you.

2 upvotes
Photato
By Photato (Mar 21, 2013)

@Andy. Pentax has a collection of nice small pancakes including a 21mm one. But yeah, it seems that the longer flange distance is what makes it difficult for small wide or normal lenses for EF-S.
However, EF-S, despite all these years (10yr) still lacks wide prime lenses regardless of size or weight.

0 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Mar 21, 2013)

the 24mm IS, 28mm IS, 35mm IS, 50mm 1.8, 40mm pancake, 18-55 EF-S and even really the 55-250 EF-S are at the last time i checked .. pretty small lenses.

0 upvotes
Wally626
By Wally626 (Mar 21, 2013)

Robert Deutsch (2 hours ago)

Reason for lack of small collapsable zoom has more to do with lens registration distance than APS-C sensor size. Sony just released the E-mount 16-50mm zoom which is similar to the Panasonic for a APS-C sensor. The longer lens registration distance means that at the 17 or 18mm end of the Canon kit lens it would have to be retro-focus, which makes it hard to make it short.

0 upvotes
Mirfak
By Mirfak (Mar 21, 2013)

Larger pixels means less megapixels on the sensor. No company is brave enough to do that.

0 upvotes
chadley_chad
By chadley_chad (Mar 21, 2013)

Cant see peoples reasons for complaint; I never liked the EOS range due to their large hollow like feel - favouring Nikon for a smaller more sturdy build or even the Samsung NX11 touted as the 'smallest' DSLR. A smaller full sized DSLR (as opposed to a mirrorless offering) IMO will do well for its target market .... and if you want something more 'substantial', look at the more pro range!

I feel sorry for Canon ... they bring out a product (as opposed to nothing at all) and all people can do is moan!!!!

3 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Mar 21, 2013)

> I feel sorry for Canon

I can't think of a camera recently that didn't have at least a few people complaining about it.

2 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (Mar 21, 2013)

Canon are to cameras what GM was to the car business IMO. Very popular, selling a lot of units. But not very exciting. Personally, I find the company deeply frustrating. They have the capability to really move photography forward and take it unimaginable places, yet they seem so conservative when it comes to the stuff they put into main street..

1 upvote
Anepo
By Anepo (Mar 21, 2013)

but the problem is they bring out a product that is just like the product of the last 4 years, you would not be happy with for example FORD releasing the same model car each year with the only difference beeing a different paint job would you?

0 upvotes
BeanyPic
By BeanyPic (Mar 21, 2013)

Just been reading through some of the comments below. Canon should thank their stars that the people who are trying their best to find fault with this camera know not what they speak.
Adding a swivel screen would do 2 things... Make it bigger and the screen size would have to be smaller. People this is the nearest thing to Dr Who's Tardis that you'll get. When you can break the laws of Physics please share with the world and brands will buy it from you.
This will beat Sony's and Olympus's try and fail cameras, that promise so much on the box but fail when it comes to the real world.

0 upvotes
LJ - Eljot
By LJ - Eljot (Mar 21, 2013)

But a swivel screen is so incredibly useful and convenient! The few mm are nothing compared to what you get.

1 upvote
Anepo
By Anepo (Mar 21, 2013)

Yes because the OM-D E-M5 is so much bigger with its rotating screen, oh wait a second! And yes olympus cameras are such a failure that is why one of they're cameras won according to 90% of photographic websites "camera of the year" award. Oh wait! Canon is the one whos sucking HARD right now And I say that as someone who has owned 5 different Canon models and finally gave up on them.

0 upvotes
dpalugyay
By dpalugyay (Mar 21, 2013)

BeanyPic. You really don't need to be dogging Olympus cameras anymore. They are coming out with some damn good cameras as of late. You should check out the EM-5 for example. What a beautiful camera, feels and looks great, has tiny quality primes, and takes beautiful photographs. Looking for something more P&S with outstanding quality, versatility and control? Look at the XZ-2. Olympus is kicking ass as of late. You really should take a few minutes and hit the reviews on the EM-5 and the wonderful glass you can mate it to.

0 upvotes
Entropius
By Entropius (Mar 22, 2013)

While you're saying that Olympus cameras "try and fail", there are people running around taking fantastic images with them despite their quirks. People also shot great stuff on (gasp) ISO 25 Kodachrome.

0 upvotes
Dennis
By Dennis (Mar 21, 2013)

This will undoubtedly keep a few potential ILC buyers in the Canon camp, but otherwise isn't much of a game changer. It will probably make it onto store shelves and be more visible to consumers than some of the ILC options. I could also see some Canon owners picking one up as a second body, though it seems a little pricey for that. It will probably

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Mar 21, 2013)

A lot of people still pick DSLRs over ILCs, so a headline feature like "world's smallest" may sway them to this one.

1 upvote
gpsgps
By gpsgps (Mar 21, 2013)

Add a twist & swivel screen to it and it's mine. Otherwise I'll patiently wait until competition learns to instal them and I'll forget the Canon name.

0 upvotes
Mark B.
By Mark B. (Mar 21, 2013)

There's the Rebel line, as well as the 60D, if you want a swivel LCD.

0 upvotes
retro76
By retro76 (Mar 21, 2013)

I love my OM-D, but I have longed for a smaller Canon SLR. The slow focusing of the OM-D, poor controls and menus, and smaller sensor (DOF) have been things I have had trouble moving past. Looks like the OM-D is going up for sale !

1 upvote
BingoCharlie
By BingoCharlie (Mar 21, 2013)

If your E-M5 is focusing slowly, you should send it back to Olympus for repair.

5 upvotes
Ross the Fidller
By Ross the Fidller (Mar 21, 2013)

M4/3's lenses are fast focussing, but maybe he is talking about the 4/3's lenses. If not, then get it fixed or .....

0 upvotes
BingoCharlie
By BingoCharlie (Mar 21, 2013)

Maybe he missed this part of the preview. "The focusing speed of the updated hybrid phase and contrast-detect design remains unchanged, which unfortunately means that it still lags behind current mirrorless cameras from Sony, Olympus and Panasonic."

7 upvotes
retro76
By retro76 (Mar 21, 2013)

I mean focusing with moving targets. With my Canon 60D, i never had trouble with moving subjects like my kids. I hated the 60D size so I sold it in favor of the OM-D. The OM-D + 45 1.8 is too slow to capture moving subject matter. I find focus aquisition many times slower than my former 60D, plus I hate the black out time of the EVF. I never had OOF shots with an SLR and while the OM-D is super fast, it still not SLR fast when the moment counts. I bought the OM-D for its size advantage, but unfortunately there are too many limitations that I personally (and this is subjective) cannot live with over a traditional SLR. The Canon 100D gives me those features back in a small package.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
MichaelKJ
By MichaelKJ (Mar 21, 2013)

Sounds like you don't really love your OM-D. If you weren't aware that CDAF is still inferior to PDAF for moving subjects when you bought the OM-D, you have only yourself to blame. I hope you are happy with the 100D.

2 upvotes
Jorginho
By Jorginho (Mar 21, 2013)

DSLR seems the way to go. But AFAIK the hybrid AF system of the Canon (including this one) is worse than the one on your 60D. why weren't you aware of this shortcoming of the OMD btw? It was well known I think...So better to inform yourself well on how good this hybrid AF system is before you buy into another thing that leaves you longing for something better.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Mar 21, 2013)

@BingoCharlie Slow hybrid AF is only a problem in liveview, while using the OVF you get full PDAF as with any other DSLR.

1 upvote
retro76
By retro76 (Mar 21, 2013)

Ok I will blame myself, are you happy now LOL. Don't care who is to blame, truth is mirrorless is still far far behind - YMMV.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Mirfak
By Mirfak (Mar 21, 2013)

100D doesn't have the same AF as the 60D (only one cross-type sensor vs. 9 on the 60D. You're not going to get the same performance with moving subjects on the 100D.

0 upvotes
Anepo
By Anepo (Mar 21, 2013)

You apparently don't own an OM-D because if you did, nr1. the controls handle great, the Focus is VERY VERY FAST! (equally as fast as the 650D) and I could go on and on.

0 upvotes
dpalugyay
By dpalugyay (Mar 21, 2013)

OM-D is one of the fastest focusing cameras existing at this moment, so you have issues or are using an old phase detect lens.

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Mar 21, 2013)

The reason I won't buy Canon is because of their woeful dynamic range. Yet they are the only ones who produce zoom lenses with decent bokeh which is also on my prerequisite list.

sigh!

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Mar 21, 2013)

1080p30 will be familiar to followers of all Canon cameras unlike Panasonic and Sony with 1080p60. You could get the Canon EOS-1D C with 1080p60 but at a $12K price.

1 upvote
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Mar 21, 2013)

Not smaller than Pentax K-x, but lighter.

1 upvote
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Mar 21, 2013)

EOS 100D: 117 x 91 x 69 mm Pentax K-x: 123 x 92 x 68 mm

7 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (Mar 21, 2013)

Just a tiny bit smaller. Looks like the Pentax K-2000 was just 4 years too early? :)

1 upvote
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Mar 21, 2013)

Pentax included AF motor and image stabilizer in body. Canon apply some fireworks on this new cam.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Entropius
By Entropius (Mar 21, 2013)

So Canon just invented the E-410. Cool!

14 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 21, 2013)

Yeah, but with usable ISO 800.

3 upvotes
Entropius
By Entropius (Mar 21, 2013)

I have shots from my E-510 (same sensor as the 410) at ISO 800 (and even pushed 2/3 stop in post) printed 16x20 that look great. Yeah, the sensor is ancient and not so good, but it's not that bad, either.

1 upvote
Leo LS
By Leo LS (Mar 21, 2013)

Perfect with 40mm STM

1 upvote
The Lotus Eater
By The Lotus Eater (Mar 21, 2013)

Not really, 40mm is a no man's land lens on APS-C.

If there was a 28mm STM, I'd agree with you.

6 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Mar 21, 2013)

I'm a Canon shooter and this is just dumb. What possible market gap is this filling?

0 upvotes
_Federico_
By _Federico_ (Mar 21, 2013)

Epic fail. A mirrorless camera will be more coherent.
Smaller lenses, smaller body.

Pointless strategy.

21 upvotes
Ross the Fidller
By Ross the Fidller (Mar 21, 2013)

They tried that & failed with very slow AF & no provision for an EVF. I really believe somehow, that it was done on purpose to try (somehow again) to discredit the mirrorless concept, & failed with that too. Now they want to blow their trumpet over features like art filters that Olympus & Pentax started with & combining multiple exposures like Fuji's EXR system cameras have done for several years (well, a few).

5 upvotes
Lawrencew
By Lawrencew (Mar 21, 2013)

Like that. If only they could have squeezed a tilt or vari angle LCD in there.

1 upvote
rsf3127
By rsf3127 (Mar 21, 2013)

So this is a Sony SLT-a35 without the big and bright EVF and with a dim and narrow OVF, a lower fps and a touchscreen.

I'll pass.

6 upvotes
MarcMedios
By MarcMedios (Mar 21, 2013)

Perfect street camera

2 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Mar 21, 2013)

What's with the size obsession? I'm a normal sized adult Caucasian male, and even the grip on the old Rebel was too small.

At least CSC cameras have small, light lenses so the grip is far less important. But being the smallest and lightest DSLR is kind of pointless if practically EVERY CSC is smaller still.

It's like being the lightest person in the slimming club.

14 upvotes
fakuryu
By fakuryu (Mar 21, 2013)

I wonder how really small this is, from the looks of it, could be just as small as the old Pentax K-M

1 upvote
RichRMA
By RichRMA (Mar 21, 2013)

Flat black and boring. Canon, the Model T of the 21st century.

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Mar 21, 2013)

flat black like the original stealth fighter F117, bomber B2 and other older stealth tech... SR-71, etc

black is 'low key' stealth. and it works as intended. get it?

sdyue

0 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (Mar 21, 2013)

No. In this case, its flat black because it's cheaper to make it that way and Canon believe they can get away with it. Now thats fine in a 5D3 or a 1DX, but at the local best buy a NEX or Oly PEN / OMD is a lot sexier.

3 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (Mar 21, 2013)

any other color would show signs of wear pretty quickly. even if you wash your hand every time you want to use the camera, there's still the effect of the hands' perspiration to consider.

1 upvote
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Mar 21, 2013)

Yeah, because the colorful K-01 was such a success that Pentax... killed it. How many people opted for the red Nikon D3200? Canon picks what sells.

0 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (Mar 22, 2013)

Whatever sells is often not what's better got photographers... and I'm not referring to the body colour.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (Mar 21, 2013)

AF MICROADJUSTMENT, CANON??? Or should everyone be sending your FF and BF camera-lens combos to you all the $&@&$& time? Just a thought...

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Mar 21, 2013)

Most people who buy these cheaper cameras only use the kit lens and would only get themselves into trouble trying to use the AF micro adjust.

2 upvotes
RStyga
By RStyga (Mar 22, 2013)

I don't think such people would even know to go to the corresponding menu and play with it. It's just a marketing dept decision of the stupid kind. Unless Pentax did not do well for including such a feature to its lowly K-r...

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Mar 21, 2013)

Trust Canon to cover all the bases of the "affordability strata" and churn out models with camera prices in increments of $100.

.

5 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (Mar 21, 2013)

It's all a bit "meh" is'nt it?

Is it just me or is it really hard to get enthusiastic about these shapeless black plastic lumps?

Good IQ is a given. But then you get great IQ with a NEX, or M4/3 or whatever.

Other manufacturers are starting to make cameras which are covetable. They are nice objects to own.

Canon don't seem to get this. All their products are so darn plasticky and dull and generally hard to love. At the leisure end of the market, this matters IMO.

20 upvotes
what_i_saw
By what_i_saw (Mar 21, 2013)

<Other manufacturers are starting to make cameras which are covetable. They are nice objects to own. >

I think what you really want to buy is some Jewellery. :-)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 41 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
BingoCharlie
By BingoCharlie (Mar 21, 2013)

I hope all these people who hate beautiful cameras are driving around in black Toyota Corollas. Because otherwise they're a bunch of hypocrites.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (Mar 21, 2013)

And there was me thinking Liberace was dead.......

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Mar 21, 2013)

Hasselblad designed the Lunar just for you. Enjoy! ;-)

1 upvote
Entropius
By Entropius (Mar 22, 2013)

The camera I've got in my backpack has peeling rubber and the writing is wearing off. It's an ugly lump with an an ugly lens on the front (at the moment, the ZD 35/3.5 macro). Yet it takes lovely images, and *those* are what I am enthusiastic about and whose appearance matters to me, not the camera itself.

0 upvotes
Mister J
By Mister J (Mar 21, 2013)

Like the weight trim and touch screen.

But no articulated screen - shame.

3 upvotes
blank_
By blank_ (Mar 21, 2013)

but that's why they could make the mody thinner. I'd drop the flash too, but obviously majority wants it.

I really like the concept.

this camera would be a nice complement to my 5D, shame there are no compact wide angle ef-s prime lenses

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Grevture
By Grevture (Mar 21, 2013)

In reply to blank_

Wow, someone who actually get's it :-)

People have different sized hands and want to carry around different sized photographic tools. Canon is catering to that variation and immediately a bunch of know-it-all personalities compete in criticizing it ...

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Mar 21, 2013)

This feels like they admit the EOS M did not do it. So they try to fight M43 from different direction.

8 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Mar 21, 2013)

That assumes that Canon is only capable of going in one direction at a time. I highly doubt that. Canon is a big company with a lot of resources. You can bet that Canon is continuing to develop their mirrorless offerings as we speak. Unlike a company like Olympus, which can't afford to simultaneously support development of both 4/3 DSLRs and m4/3 MILCs, Canon can do both mirrorless and mirrored cameras at the same time because they have much deeper pockets, much greater resources, and they sell a heck of a lot more cameras.

2 upvotes
arscii
By arscii (Mar 21, 2013)

With you on that one.

I'm a Canon boy myself. If Canon wanted there to be a mirrorless pro market there would be one and Canon would be in it, and on all the evidence probably dominating it. That being the case, Canon's response to enthusiast mirrorless is to be nominally represented (EOS-M) and otherwise present an increasing number of competing concepts to it (G1X, 100D.)

Once upon a time I had been hoping that Canon would embrace mirrorless. Pro mirrorless would be a wonderful departure. Sony has proved what many suspected - FF can be delivered in compact size.

It looks to me now that the very conservative Canon is determined to coral the market in technologies in which Canon is well established and in which Canon believes it has advantages. No surprise there in the corporate world.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Mar 21, 2013)

"If Canon wanted there to be a mirrorless pro market there would be one and Canon would be in it"

...on the contrary, Canon doesn't have as much power to *create* a mirrorless pro market as you seem to think. Pro photogs are notoriously conservative when it comes to their equipment, and they like to stick to what they think works. Right now, what works for them is the tried-and-true OVF and reflex mirror. Sure, more pros will eventually adopt mirrorless, but we're still a long way from that. It's still primarily a consumer product, not one that has been widely adopted by pros. Canon runs a far greater risk of alienating pros by moving too fast with mirrorless "pro" bodies...too much of a departure, too quickly, at least to a lot of working pro photogs. If you've hung around these forums long enough, you've probably seen a lot of serious photographers vehemently and rabidly against mirrorless bodies and their EVFs. I'd say that's pretty typical amongst pro shooters right now.

7 upvotes
Ross the Fidller
By Ross the Fidller (Mar 21, 2013)

Canon could have done a great mirrorless camera if they wanted to (maybe), but their concept of dumbing down lower models seems to get in the way & so they obviously weren't too bothered in getting a fast AF happening nor making any provision for expansion with adding an EVF etc.

Actually, I think Canon relies too much on their name sometimes.

0 upvotes
hiplnsdrftr
By hiplnsdrftr (Mar 21, 2013)

uh, as an actual professional photographer, I will say that while I use a 1Dx I also have a GF1, was tempted to buy a NEX7 and/or an XE1 and currently plan on buying the Nikon Coolpix A.

I can only speak for myself but I have no reservations of adding mirrorless cameras to my kit. If Canon made a serious mirrorless camera I would likely buy it.

I used to buy every Canon Gx and Sxx that came out. I definitely don't do that any more. Other than the 1D series Canon no longer exists for me.

0 upvotes
aired
By aired (Mar 21, 2013)

cool hope they will find a way to have multi angle screen

0 upvotes
Total comments: 379
123