North Light report rumours that the M3 will be announced in Q3 (Photokina?), and that two models will be launched including a much anticipated (well, anticipated by M system aficionados) prosumer version.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
M3 Rumour
- Thread starter Lawrencew
- Start date
Jonathan Brady
Veteran Member
Abu Mahendra
Veteran Member
There better be some lenses. Otherwise it will be a system of four bodies and three lenses.
Wouldn't that be something! I'm confident there will be lenses, but not necessarily in US.
Not that patents mean that much, but the 22-46mm 3.5/5.6 lens patent is intriguing. Presumably a pancake. IS?
Jonathan Brady
Veteran Member
Doesn't Sony have more bodies (including discontinued) than lenses? I could be wrong as I haven't kept up with their system lately.
For me, the lenses aren't as important because I don't see me replacing my DSLR with a mirrorless any time soon. For me, the body was the limiting factor and is what caused me to sell my M setup.
If an M with DPAF equal to or better than the 70D comes out (it's reasonable to assume that tech will improve over time, I think) as well as a hinged display like the new G1X2, then the M will become what I need: a small, take-everywhere body with a high IQ normal prime (22/2) and a great video lens (18-55).
IF they made a 35, 50, and 85 pancake (I'm not sure an 85 pancake is even physically possible), ESPECIALLY with IS, I would probably buy them, but I don't feel I NEED them.
When I need capabilities beyond what those two main lenses offer, I can't see me depending on a mirrorless body for it.
I realize that there are a LOT of people out there who would benefit from a wider range of high quality, low price lenses though so I'm all for Canon releasing a LOT of them.
And hell, maybe they'll make something I didn't know I wanted
Last edited:
Abu Mahendra
Veteran Member
I have no big qualms with the M. I'll take instead a EF-M 32F2 STM IS and a small 50-150F4 STM IS. Add the existing 11-22, and you have a killer three-lens kit.
dan the man p
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,281
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 1,593
As someone without any non EF-M lenses, I'd rather see new lenses this year than new bodies. I don't plan to upgrade the body for a few years anyway.
Regarding video, I doubt an M3 will shoot 4K.
Perhaps some other video upgrade such as 1920x1080 50/60p, 120fps 1280x720, higher bitrate, etc.
Last edited:
Which will be condemned for having a Launch Price that is way too high.
and only available in AsiaWhich will be condemned for having a Launch Price that is way too high.
PhotoKhan
Forum Pro
Change "M3" for "M2" and this is exactly the same "rumor" published exactly one year ago.
Sad, sad Canon these days...Having these rumors going around and not being able to come up with nothing more than slight improvements over the previous model (M1 ---> M2).
PK
PaddyC
Forum Enthusiast
I'm taking this rumour with numerous grains of salt. Would be glad to see it come to pass (as always).
MoreorLess
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 5,976
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 3,481
I'm guessing that if this rumour is correct and we see one body with a viewfinder and one without that the latter will replace the existing M bodies so your down to just two there.
Whilst the current "system" isn't that broad I'd argue that if Canon are aiming for a low/mid level market it doesn't actually need to be to do well. You add in a slow tele zoom and a normalish macro and honestly I think you have the needs of 90% of potential users covered.
+1
That statement makes no sense. Every product needs to "do well" to be successful and meet it's desired sales.
I've seen patents for EF-M zooms but not primes on canonrumors.com so I think your wish won't be fulfilled. There's already a fast 22mm lens, so there's no point for a 30mm fast lens too now is there?
Ben Ramsey
Active member
>"There's already a fast 22mm lens, so there's no point for a 30mm fast lens too now is there?"
So, because there is a 35 equivalent, there's no reason for an equivalent to 50? Sorry, but I think you're wrong here. There is a significant difference between the two, and I'm sure many, including myself would prefer the latter. I do agree that it could be quite a wait before those particular holes in the lineup are filled.
So, because there is a 35 equivalent, there's no reason for an equivalent to 50? Sorry, but I think you're wrong here. There is a significant difference between the two, and I'm sure many, including myself would prefer the latter. I do agree that it could be quite a wait before those particular holes in the lineup are filled.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum