Canon Mirrorless EOS M5

pannumon · Sep 9, 2016

Tom Caldwell said:
ahaslett said:

Tom

That's a tempting thought. Even more low cost used EF lenses than produced by DR seeking Canon users switching to the A7R2.

Click to expand...

Canon had to do something - good enough to keep its fans from slipping away to other mounts via electronic EF adapters and not that good enough to take away business from its cash-cow pro dslr bodies.

They tried the first EF-M bodies and left the evf out to cripple them. My thoughts "why bother?".

Now by providing a EF-M camera with an evf and styled as faux dslr they are providing their users with a dagger to stab their own dslr model line in the heart.

I am glad that I kept my EF lenses and did not join in the reselling frenzy.

Reminds me of the Merino fine wool price crisis of the 1960's where two brothers divided the ancestral farm on either side of a road. One sold off his fine stud Merinos to buy Southdown (sheep) as better meat producers then moved to cattle when that did not work. The other battled through the hard times with his Merino stud until the price recovered. Some years later the first was deeply in debt and the latter was out of debt and making good money.

Sometimes we are better making a choice and sticking with that good judgement than in chasing rainbows by buying and reselling. There is merit in selling unused gear in order to buy other gear but buying and selling always takes a monetary hit and sometimes if it can be afforded sticking with good gear that presently might not seme to have a future might come round full cycle. How many sold EF gear, bought M4/3 gear and are now considering selling it to fund EF-M gear - or poo-poohing the new camera simply because they think it might present any threat to the M4/3 mount format.

Selling used gear and buying brand new gear will make you lose money. But effectively exchanging used gear to used gear on average means that you are not losing anything. Regarding to camera bodies it is of course a totally another story, because by owning a camera body means that you are losing capital anyway. If photography is not just your hobby, you can calculate how much more you can earn because of the equipment. It seems that the prices of the lenses almost newer get up, but it's a much safer investment than camera bodies.

Anyway, I am almost certain that selling the EF-gear 5 years ago, investing the money, and buying the same gear again today would have given you about at least 20% of more capita. It's not terribly much, but it's the opposite of losing money. On the other hand, you could give the lenses you are not using to be hired. The hire price should be approximately the same as the interest rate (but you should take into account the wear on the lenses). My point is, that if the market works, selling the lenses or hiring the lenses should be about as good market decisions. Keeping the lenses on a closet gives 0% interest and makes you not to get anything for the capital investment.

Tom Caldwell · Sep 9, 2016

Pixnat2 said:
With the Fuji XPro2, X-T2, X-A3 and now the EOS-M5, APS-C mirrorless is rising the bar.

The IQ gap with m4/3 is widening.

Fuji has a wonderful lens lineup, Canon not yet, but the have some little jewels that are cheap and optically awesome (22mm , 11-22mm).

The bar is high for m4/3. They'd better take their thumbs off and work on solutions to provide better IQ. If they succeed, m4/3 will remain the best mirrorless system. If not...

Pete_CSCS · Sep 9, 2016

justmeMN said:
justmeMN said:

skamaraju wrote: Is this going to effect Olympus future?

Click to expand...

As Thom Hogan put it "if Olympus were a Western company, I have no doubt that the camera group would have long ago been jettisoned due to its sustained unprofitability."

Olympus seems determined to stay in the camera business, and I doubt that that will change any time soon.

... is that Oly uses some of their technology they develop for their cameras, over in their medical division, where they make most of their money.

Hen3ry · Sep 9, 2016

Not only is it Canon, but it is in an established format. The body is within the general size range of the top m43 bodies, and it will get more dedicated lenses as well as adapters for existing lenses.

To suggest otherwise is to imitate the Ostrich (hey, doesn’t it get sand in its eyes too?).

Pete_CSCS · Sep 9, 2016

lattesweden said:
skamaraju said:

What is going to be the effect of entry of Big Two into mirrorless world? Is this going to effect Olympus future? Your opinions please..

Click to expand...

It somehow reminds me of a Canonisted Panasonic G7 in the looks.

Apart from that, I think Canon are on the wrong route with their mirrorless venture.

They should do a FF mirrorless with a high megapixel sensor, like the one from the new 5DmkIV or from the 5Ds and use the existing lens mount and market that as a landscape, portrait, architecture, studio camera. More or less a Sony A7RII competitor. That would make sense. To own a two body system from Canon with one DSLR for fast action and one camera for Landscapes etc with EVF would probably keep a lot of users happy and keep them from migrating to Sony.

...developing a FF mirrorless dslr as is Nikon, who will probably come out with theirs first.

lattesweden · Sep 9, 2016

Pete_CSCS said:
>To own a two body system from Canon with one DSLR for fast action and one >camera for Landscapes etc with EVF would probably keep a lot of users happy and >keep them from migrating to Sony.

...developing a FF mirrorless dslr as is Nikon, who will probably come out with theirs first.

A Nikon D750 (or the new D760 if the rumors are correct) for action, paired with a second EVF versioned body for landscapes would also make a lot of people happy.

I wonder if they couldn't even put out a DSLR with an add on EVF to stick in the flash socket, like a lot of mirrorless LCD only cameras do it.

It would be like in this image below, where someone has put the VF-4 on an E-M1, except that the lower native finder would be the optic mirrored one.

--

Best regards
/Anders
----------------------------------------------------
You don't have to like my pictures, but here they are: http://www.lattermann.com/gallery

Cheezr · Sep 9, 2016

Bhima78 said:
It will sell like crazy. Likely take number one spot on mirrorless sales simply because of that Canon badge. I mean, the warmed over M3 put Canon in the #3 mirrorless sellers and its a terrible camera. This camera looks like Canon's first real attempt at a solid mirrorless offering, so I'm expecting this to shake up the market sector.

The image quality is more than acceptable but the performance is as you say terrible and the ergonomics just acceptable. Still, it is a very competent camera crippled only really by its makers protectionist stance towards their Rebels.

justmeMN · Sep 9, 2016

lattesweden said:
Apart from that, I think Canon are on the wrong route with their mirrorless venture.

They should do a FF mirrorless with a high megapixel sensor, ...

APS-C sensor size is where the huge sales volume is.

At the end of this article, Thom Hogan explains why he doesn't think there will be a FF Nikon mirrorless camera any time soon. I think the same applies to Canon.

Loading…

www.dslrbodies.com

pannumon · Sep 9, 2016

lattesweden said:
Pete_CSCS said:

>To own a two body system from Canon with one DSLR for fast action and one >camera for Landscapes etc with EVF would probably keep a lot of users happy and >keep them from migrating to Sony.

...developing a FF mirrorless dslr as is Nikon, who will probably come out with theirs first.

Click to expand...

A Nikon D750 (or the new D760 if the rumors are correct) for action, paired with a second EVF versioned body for landscapes would also make a lot of people happy.

I wonder if they couldn't even put out a DSLR with an add on EVF to stick in the flash socket, like a lot of mirrorless LCD only cameras do it.

It would be like in this image below, where someone has put the VF-4 on an E-M1, except that the lower native finder would be the optic mirrored one.

It could lead to what is suggested in this very same thread: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58314046

That is, that they would have to admit to the customers that mirrorless technology in some ways have benefits over DSLRs. As I replied in to the post linked above, this could lead to a mass transition from DSLRs to Micro Four Thirds.

The logic goes: because Canon introduces a serious mirrorless camera, Canon will admit that mirrorless is OK. Customers will however realize that other mirrorless than the Canon system are in fact much better. This would mean a flow from DSLR users to mirrorless users. At the same time, Panasonic G8x is gonna hit the market. According to the rumors, it will simply destroy the competition.

Marty4650 · Sep 9, 2016

Olympus and Panasonic need to take this seriously. And so does Sony and Fuji.

Taking the short term view, Sony FE, M4/3 and Fuji X still have a huge advantage in the MILC Wars, but do not underestimate Canon and Nikon's potential.

They haven't been competitive in the MILC market so far, but that was by choice. The day the two sleeping giants come out of their self induced coma, they will be a mighty force to reckon with.

Can anyone dispute any of these points?

They both have huge marketing muscle
They both have plenty of engineering and design talent
They both have the ability to execute well
They both have HUGE installed bases of very brand loyal customers

Building a great MILC System isn't rocket science, especially when you jump in last, after everyone else has done all the hard work for you. You just see what works best, and copy it. Do it better if you can, but even if you can only do it "just as well" you will still be rewarded due to those four points above.

Being the innovator isn't worth much today. The market always goes to who executes BEST, not to who did it first.

For the record, Canon didn't invent the camera. Toyota didn't invent the car. And Apple didn't invent the smartphone. In every case they were late arrivals, sometimes by decades. But all three became market leaders because they executed best.

I am very aware that M4/3 has the most complete lens catalog, Fuji has some outstanding lenses, and Sony has the unique advantage of having the only affordable full frame MILC system. Yes, they are affordable, because the only other full frame MILC camera is the Leica SL.

But if you take the long view (and you must do this if you believe MILC is here to stay, and not a passing fad) then you have to admit that Canon really CAN make great lenses, and should have no problem creating a few dozen good ones in the next several years. Their loyal fans will wait for them.

If Canon is smart, and I think they are, they will realize that their goal is to "sell cameras and lenses" and not just to "sell a lot of DSLRs only." They will build whatever customers want, not what they prefer to sell.

The truth is DSLR sales are in decline, and MILC sales are pretty much flat. Making it a bad business strategy to only produce the former and ignore the later. They need to be aggressively marketing BOTH.

A few short years ago DSLRs outsold MILC cameras five to one. Today DSLRs outsell MILC cameras two to one, but if current trends continue someday they might sell in equal numbers, and at some further time MILC could outsell DSLRs. They need to prepare for that possibility by having a strong presence in BOTH markets.

And before someone says "cannibalism" let me remind you that Apple KNEW that their iPhone would kill off their hugely successful iPod, but they released it anyway. They knew if they didn't kill the iPod, then someone else would. They knew they were better off if their iPods were replaced by their iPhones, rather than a competitor's smartphone.

This is called "forward thinking" and a sure sign of good management. And this is something most camera makers struggle with, even though most tech companies accept.

situman1 · Sep 9, 2016

Pete_CSCS said:
... will pass Olympus for the number 2 position in mirrorless sales.

sportyaccordy · Sep 9, 2016

averagejoe576 said:
Now if Canon cameout with their on EF speedbooster for $200 that'd be really interesting. Even if they had to loose money off the thing it might be justifiable to increase sales of EOS-M cameras.

The ergonomics would be so terrible though. I'm pretty turned off by the balance of middle of the road EF glass on my A7II like the 35/2 IS. With something like a 2.8 zoom forget about it.........

Interesting play by Canon. That screen looks massive and it looks like it has the right number of dials and controls. Nice grip too. Question now is how they fill in the lens lineup. Without that they will stagnate like pretty much every other crop system that isn't MFT or Fujifilm. Selling people on leaving systems these days is risky business.

grcolts · Sep 9, 2016

I had the EOS-M for a while and basically liked it.

The major downfall of it was that it was sooo slow focusing.

If and when the focus comes up to par, it could prove to be a winner.

Will have to wait and see...

Messier Object · Sep 9, 2016

Tom Caldwell said:
Messier Object said:

wolfie said:

dv312 said:

Body wise, it's not too bad in terms of specs

The lens offering is still meager, the kit zoom slowish

I'm sure some will jump on this just to experience APSC sized sensor

The system needs to mature a bit in order for it to compete in the mirrorless arena IMHO

At least it's more appealing than the Nikon 1 offering me think which is going nowhere at the moment

Maybe we'll see a surprise from Nikon to counteract the M5 at Photokina?

Cheers,

Click to expand...

Reminds me of Fuji mirrorless - not much saving in overall size due to APS sensor and lens size.

Click to expand...

why must a mirrorless system be small ?

As a Canon user (as well as Olympus 4/3) I have zero interest in a new Canon mirrorless format if I cannot natively use my EF lenses. I would be delighted if Canon would, when the technology is ready, simply remove the mirror and install an EVF on their existing sized APS-C and FF bodies - provided that the AF performance is good enough

Click to expand...

I agree Peter. I kept my EF lenses when I refused to keep playing the expensive dslr camera body rollover game.

But I have to add that a ML (mirrorless) camera design is naturally smaller because it can replace a bulky mirror box ovf with a more compact evf unit. Furthermore it lends itself to the RF style body and no longer truly needs the centre hump other than for retro style and the practicality of having a high spot for a flash unit (and for the some that simply like it that way).

So revise, revise and you get a camera much the same as the rather pointless Pentax K-01 with a snout to accommodate the longer flange focal length lenses.

Short of filling "the box" with a lot of air space it is going to be smaller by default.

Smart Canon cameras must meet half-way - like the Olympus E-M1 - as large as a Sony A7 series with short flange focal length mount and a "tube" to accommodate the EF lenses. Clever money would suggest that this dumb adapter could be supplemented by a focal reduction version for EF-S lenses and Metabones have the technology even though Canon knows its own circuits better.

Hey! Would they ever legitimise the focal reduction adapter by making their own? Sigma has almost set a precedent there.

But too much help to migrate would mean that Canon would be taking a wrecking bar to its own dslr camera body line - better move slowly - first they need to sell a few literal shiploads of cheap ML camera bodies so that they have a market for making more EF-M lenses.

But where this leaves the millions of EF lenses is something that leaves imagination boggling. Methinks that the pro-dslr body style will be around for a while longer or Canon is going to suffer lots of pain.

Finally somebody who actually read my post and understood my point. No Canon Pro or committed enthusiast is going to accept having to use an adapter to fit their 500mm f/4 L to the new 1DxM or 5DM and they will kick Canon in the rear end if it's suggested that they have to buy all new lenses to get the best performance from the new mirrorless camera line.

Size and weight may well be the reason for being of micro 4/3, but IMO for committed DSLR users size is secondary.

As to the shape of the evolving camera body, yes I completely agree that the hump will eventually go, but I think that the grip size will remain, either integral with the body or via a pro grip that mounts to and locks onto the smaller body. Those big white lenses are heavy and every mm of grip and purchase on the camera body helps with stability and security.

Peter

Tom Caldwell said:
Tom Caldwell said:

And Micro 4/3 will be better served by market share if the 2 big players (Nikon and Canon) do not replace their line of DSLRs with mirrorless cameras that are compact and lightweight. That way m.43 retains its size difference to differentiate it in the market.

Peter

Tom Caldwell said:

Personally not a temptation to move away from M43 as it doesn't offer decent WR sealed body and lenses.

--
Shoot the Light fantastic
https://aucklandswoffer.wordpress.com

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Tom Caldwell

tonyC1994 · Sep 9, 2016

Canon eos m is always a threat to all other mirrorless brands. Don't forget canon knocked Panasonic off the third place at bcn ranking of mirrorless.

skamaraju · Sep 9, 2016

Marty4650 said:
Olympus and Panasonic need to take this seriously. And so does Sony and Fuji.

Taking the short term view, Sony FE, M4/3 and Fuji X still have a huge advantage in the MILC Wars, but do not underestimate Canon and Nikon's potential.

They haven't been competitive in the MILC market so far, but that was by choice. The day the two sleeping giants come out of their self induced coma, they will be a mighty force to reckon with.

Can anyone dispute any of these points?

They both have huge marketing muscle

They both have plenty of engineering and design talent

They both have the ability to execute well

They both have HUGE installed bases of very brand loyal customers

JaKing · Sep 9, 2016

Pete_CSCS said:
justmeMN said:

Pete_CSCS said:

skamaraju wrote: Is this going to effect Olympus future?

Click to expand...

As Thom Hogan put it "if Olympus were a Western company, I have no doubt that the camera group would have long ago been jettisoned due to its sustained unprofitability."

Olympus seems determined to stay in the camera business, and I doubt that that will change any time soon.

Click to expand...

... is that Oly uses some of their technology they develop for their cameras, over in their medical division, where they make most of their money.

.

According to my sources here in Oz, Olympus used to have three separate lens design groups, but they have been amalgamated into one.

This one is situated in the camera division, effectively making it all but impossible for that division to make a profit. However, without it, the company would either lose its capacity to design lenses (never going to happen ... ), or it would move this loss making R&D section elsewhere.

Doing the latter would have the effect of bringing the camera division back into profit, I'm told ...

The R&D section has to be located somewhere ... ;-) .

tonyC1994 · Sep 9, 2016

Marty4650 said:
Olympus and Panasonic need to take this seriously. And so does Sony and Fuji.

Taking the short term view, Sony FE, M4/3 and Fuji X still have a huge advantage in the MILC Wars, but do not underestimate Canon and Nikon's potential.

They haven't been competitive in the MILC market so far, but that was by choice. The day the two sleeping giants come out of their self induced coma, they will be a mighty force to reckon with.

Can anyone dispute any of these points?

They both have huge marketing muscle

They both have plenty of engineering and design talent

They both have the ability to execute well

They both have HUGE installed bases of very brand loyal customers

Building a great MILC System isn't rocket science, especially when you jump in last, after everyone else has done all the hard work for you. You just see what works best, and copy it. Do it better if you can, but even if you can only do it "just as well" you will still be rewarded due to those four points above.

Being the innovator isn't worth much today. The market always goes to who executes BEST, not to who did it first.

For the record, Canon didn't invent the camera. Toyota didn't invent the car. And Apple didn't invent the smartphone. In every case they were late arrivals, sometimes by decades. But all three became market leaders because they executed best.

I am very aware that M4/3 has the most complete lens catalog, Fuji has some outstanding lenses, and Sony has the unique advantage of having the only affordable full frame MILC system. Yes, they are affordable, because the only other full frame MILC camera is the Leica SL.

But if you take the long view (and you must do this if you believe MILC is here to stay, and not a passing fad) then you have to admit that Canon really CAN make great lenses, and should have no problem creating a few dozen good ones in the next several years. Their loyal fans will wait for them.

If Canon is smart, and I think they are, they will realize that their goal is to "sell cameras and lenses" and not just to "sell a lot of DSLRs only." They will build whatever customers want, not what they prefer to sell.

The truth is DSLR sales are in decline, and MILC sales are pretty much flat. Making it a bad business strategy to only produce the former and ignore the later. They need to be aggressively marketing BOTH.

A few short years ago DSLRs outsold MILC cameras five to one. Today DSLRs outsell MILC cameras two to one, but if current trends continue someday they might sell in equal numbers, and at some further time MILC could outsell DSLRs. They need to prepare for that possibility by having a strong presence in BOTH markets.

And before someone says "cannibalism" let me remind you that Apple KNEW that their iPhone would kill off their hugely successful iPod, but they released it anyway. They knew if they didn't kill the iPod, then someone else would. They knew they were better off if their iPods were replaced by their iPhones, rather than a competitor's smartphone.

This is called "forward thinking" and a sure sign of good management. And this is something most camera makers struggle with, even though most tech companies accept.

Terry Breedlove · Sep 9, 2016

Will not take me away from Olympus but Canon is huge in the market and i think it will have a big impact if they push it a bit. Also this may get Nikon into the mirrorless market with a bigger sensor as well. The two will be instant monsters in the field and really it is just up to them how serious they are about going after it. They have the name and the history and the outlets to dominate overnight if they so choose.

Pixnat2 · Sep 9, 2016

Tom Caldwell said:
Pixnat2 said:

With the Fuji XPro2, X-T2, X-A3 and now the EOS-M5, APS-C mirrorless is rising the bar.

The IQ gap with m4/3 is widening.

Fuji has a wonderful lens lineup, Canon not yet, but the have some little jewels that are cheap and optically awesome (22mm , 11-22mm).

The bar is high for m4/3. They'd better take their thumbs off and work on solutions to provide better IQ. If they succeed, m4/3 will remain the best mirrorless system. If not...

Click to expand...

Canon Mirrorless EOS M5

Senior Member

Community Leader

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts