Why cameras like the M are still worth carrying everywhere

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 2,106
Re: And here I thought I was in the M forum....
1

MyM3 wrote:

Not logical, at all! If everyone who has ever changed brand should only post negativities in the old brand forum (and not participate in the new brand forum), there would not be room for anything else than naysaying. I came here from Sony a few years ago because I didn’t like Sony anymore (or said differently: I liked Canon better). But I would never (and not even think about) post a single post in the Sony forum about any negativity about Sony cameras or lenses (even if I have loads of data and evidence). It’s just not “the right thing” to do.

People use this forum to gather information about a system. If they get informed only by people happy with the system singing hallelujah all together, i think it will give a less balanced vision on the system (not only getting the pro's, but also the cons) compared to a situation information is also given by people who are dissatisfied by the system, eventually leading to the leaving of this system.

I find balanced - maybe if should say complete - information - both pro's and cons - more important than a sub forum hallelujah experience of folks who want to be even more happy with their system by only mentioning the advantages to each other.

I can understand mentioning disadvantages of a system can ruin the sub forum hallelujah experience, but i find complete information more important.

-- hide signature --

If your facts are different we could save the peace just by calling it copy to copy variation.

MyM3 Contributing Member • Posts: 786
Re: And here I thought I was in the M forum....
3

thunder storm wrote:

MyM3 wrote:

Not logical, at all! If everyone who has ever changed brand should only post negativities in the old brand forum (and not participate in the new brand forum), there would not be room for anything else than naysaying. I came here from Sony a few years ago because I didn’t like Sony anymore (or said differently: I liked Canon better). But I would never (and not even think about) post a single post in the Sony forum about any negativity about Sony cameras or lenses (even if I have loads of data and evidence). It’s just not “the right thing” to do.

People use this forum to gather information about a system. If they get informed only by people happy with the system singing hallelujah all together, i think it will give a less balanced vision on the system (not only getting the pro's, but also the cons) compared to a situation information is also given by people who are dissatisfied by the system, eventually leading to the leaving of this system.

I find balanced - maybe if should say complete - information - both pro's and cons - more important than a sub forum hallelujah experience of folks who want to be even more happy with their system by only mentioning the advantages to each other.

I can understand mentioning disadvantages of a system can ruin the sub forum hallelujah experience, but i find complete information more important.

So if I read you correctly, all people who own a M camera and posts in this forum are only singing hallelujah together. No current owner is helping other people with problems. No current owners are telling anyone about any problems with the cameras. No current users are asking questions about problems they have. No current owners are honest about their cameras and lenses. No current owners are posting photos so other people can see what these cameras and lenses can do (both good and bad) and sometimes commenting on them (both good and bad). No current owners are making wishes about improvements, because the cameras can not be better and they have no faults and the only thing all M owners want is telling advantages to each other all day. Right? That is what I just read out of your post.

So you would rather have all the owners to leave the forum (because they can only sing hallelujah) and invite previous owners and naysayers instead. Because they know a lot better how the recent M cameras work even if the latest camera they have owned is an M3? And even if they are trying to blame the old brand just because they are very insecure about their new and more expensive purchase. Good luck with that. I am out of here now, because I have read more than enough nonsense today. And your last post takes the cake. Good night!

(Btw. I should have taken Marco’s advice much sooner.)

nnowak Veteran Member • Posts: 4,923
Here's a thought
3

Of all of the posts in this discussion, yours are the only ones that have resorted to childish name calling and personal insults.  If you want to talk about the M system, then maybe your posts should actually be about cameras instead of your personal issues.   You would think that as a college professor, you would have learned more appropriate communication skills by now.

thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 2,106
Re: And here I thought I was in the M forum....
1

MyM3 wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

MyM3 wrote:

Not logical, at all! If everyone who has ever changed brand should only post negativities in the old brand forum (and not participate in the new brand forum), there would not be room for anything else than naysaying. I came here from Sony a few years ago because I didn’t like Sony anymore (or said differently: I liked Canon better). But I would never (and not even think about) post a single post in the Sony forum about any negativity about Sony cameras or lenses (even if I have loads of data and evidence). It’s just not “the right thing” to do.

People use this forum to gather information about a system. If they get informed only by people happy with the system singing hallelujah all together, i think it will give a less balanced vision on the system (not only getting the pro's, but also the cons) compared to a situation information is also given by people who are dissatisfied by the system, eventually leading to the leaving of this system.

I find balanced - maybe if should say complete - information - both pro's and cons - more important than a sub forum hallelujah experience of folks who want to be even more happy with their system by only mentioning the advantages to each other.

I can understand mentioning disadvantages of a system can ruin the sub forum hallelujah experience, but i find complete information more important.

So if I read you correctly, all people who own a M camera and posts in this forum are only singing hallelujah together.

You don't read correctly. You missed the word "if". I made it bold for you.

No current owner is helping other people with problems. No current owners are telling anyone about any problems with the cameras. No current users are asking questions about problems they have. No current owners are honest about their cameras and lenses. No current owners are posting photos so other people can see what these cameras and lenses can do (both good and bad) and sometimes commenting on them (both good and bad). No current owners are making wishes about improvements, because the cameras can not be better and they have no faults and the only thing all M owners want is telling advantages to each other all day. Right? That is what I just read out of your post.

So you would rather have all the owners to leave the forum (because they can only sing hallelujah) and invite previous owners and naysayers instead. Because they know a lot better how the recent M cameras work even if the latest camera they have owned is an M3? And even if they are trying to blame the old brand just because they are very insecure about their new and more expensive purchase. Good luck with that. I am out of here now, because I have read more than enough nonsense today. And your last post takes the cake. Good night!

(Btw. I should have taken Marco’s advice much sooner.)

Sorry, you really used your imagination here about what i would have said in my last post, the only problem with it is i did not say this.

-- hide signature --

If your facts are different we could save the peace just by calling it copy to copy variation.

Kinger
Kinger Contributing Member • Posts: 529
Re: Here's a thought
3

nnowak wrote:

Of all of the posts in this discussion, yours are the only ones that have resorted to childish name calling and personal insults. If you want to talk about the M system, then maybe your posts should actually be about cameras instead of your personal issues. You would think that as a college professor, you would have learned more appropriate communication skills by now.

But to be fair, your comments were mostly meant to be antagonistic. At least that’s how they appear to me.

 Kinger's gear list:Kinger's gear list
Sony RX100 III Canon EOS M5 Samsung NX mini Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM +1 more
Gesture Veteran Member • Posts: 6,603
Re: Looks like I stirred up a hornet's nest

Yep.

What I don't get from the OEMs is this.

Sure, there are hundred of millions of people who are consumers for smart phones and their cameras.

But the world population is still growing and I'd like to think improving in standard of living.  The first point doesn't preclude the OEMs from selling dedicated cameras to a quite large universe of people and making a profit at it.

But that doesn't mean they can't try harder..

I always carry a standalone camera with me.  But I would  welcome standalone cameras with larger LCDs and more in-camera editing capabilities.  I've tried out some FREE Android photo editors that are incredible. Not gimmick filters, but real curves adjustment, highlight and shadow adjustment, color balance, etc.

The quality of cameras today is superb, but I only know a few pushing the envelope—Fuji with a hybrid viewfinder; Sigma with Foveon; Ricoh with that modular camera try; perhaps Panasonic and Sony with auto focus and getting compact EVFs into a small form factor.  One of the most innovative companies, Samsung, retreated from standalone cameras.

thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 2,106
Re: Here's a thought

Kinger wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Of all of the posts in this discussion, yours are the only ones that have resorted to childish name calling and personal insults. If you want to talk about the M system, then maybe your posts should actually be about cameras instead of your personal issues. You would think that as a college professor, you would have learned more appropriate communication skills by now.

But to be fair, your comments were mostly meant to

How do you know?

be antagonistic. At least that’s how they appear to me.

Why?

-- hide signature --

If your facts are different we could save the peace just by calling it copy to copy variation.

trungtran Contributing Member • Posts: 874
Re: Excellent example
1

You think all canon has to do is reduce the price and kids will start buying the M camera?

You can pick up a brand new m10 for 300 bucks, how much lower does it need to go to shift the market?

The used market is even cheaper.  If you want a dedicated camera, you already have one.

 trungtran's gear list:trungtran's gear list
Sony a7 II Canon EOS M6 Olympus OM-D E-M10
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 2,106
Re: Excellent example
1

trungtran wrote:

You think all canon has to do is reduce the price and kids will start buying the M camera?

For young adults, especially (younger) families price matters.

You can pick up a brand new m10 for 300 bucks, how much lower does it need to go to shift the market?

As i said, you need to factor in the price of good glass.

The used market is even cheaper. If you want a dedicated camera, you already have one.

I think the M10 isn't the most appealing camera, and in the mean time it is only the camera.

M50 (or M100mkII or M6mkII) + ef-m 32mm f/1.4  (or ef-m 22mm f/2.0) + 18-150mm.....

is 1400 euro. That is a lot of money. One or two extra batteries, a bag....

I don't think it is possible for Canon to reduce the price enough still making profit.  All i wanted to point out is a camera system - including the lenses - is too expensive for some who are willing to carry the stuff around, changing lenses, etc.  The price of a basic complete package is considerably higher than a phone.

Of course you can go with only the kitlens, but in this case your paying for a camera while you are not using it to its full extend.

If a basic package would be lets say only 700 euro, i think the costumer base would be larger, even for younger persons. As i said, this is not a realistic price tag.

If course it is about personal preferences what you can call a basic package. If you love wide angle landscapes and don't care about the rest, you can buy a used M5 + ef-m + new ef-m 11-22 for only 700 euro. In this case the M system competes well with phones at its current prices.

-- hide signature --

If your facts are different we could save the peace just by calling it copy to copy variation.

nnowak Veteran Member • Posts: 4,923
Re: Here's a thought
2

Kinger wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Of all of the posts in this discussion, yours are the only ones that have resorted to childish name calling and personal insults. If you want to talk about the M system, then maybe your posts should actually be about cameras instead of your personal issues. You would think that as a college professor, you would have learned more appropriate communication skills by now.

But to be fair, your comments were mostly meant to be antagonistic. At least that’s how they appear to me.

If that is your interpretation, then you completely misread my comments in this thread.  My initial comments were based on simple equivalency calculations.  The comparison could have been between a smartphone and an old Pentax DSLR with the FA 31mm f1.8.  The resulting images would have been largely the same as well as my reaction.

Regardless of anyone's interpretation, name calling and insults should never be part of a reasoned, respectful, adult discussion.

GinaRothfels Forum Member • Posts: 90
Re: Why cameras like the M are still worth carrying everywhere
4

I read most of the discussion on my computer earlier but had to come back to look at the photos on my phone. Even at that small size the difference is amazing.

I don't need much convincing though because I hate using my phone as a camera and only do so when I'm just trying to keep a record of something like the price of a product. Even then I struggle because I find it hard to keep my phone steady enough to get decent shots. I never go anywhere without a "real" camera but size matters. That's why I'm hoping the M50 will suit my needs perfectly.

Kinger
Kinger Contributing Member • Posts: 529
Re: Here's a thought

thunder storm wrote:

Kinger wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Of all of the posts in this discussion, yours are the only ones that have resorted to childish name calling and personal insults. If you want to talk about the M system, then maybe your posts should actually be about cameras instead of your personal issues. You would think that as a college professor, you would have learned more appropriate communication skills by now.

But to be fair, your comments were mostly meant to

How do you know?

I don’t, that is why I wrote the second half of the sentence. The part after the comma.

be antagonistic. At least that’s how they appear to me.

Why?

you’re asking the wrong guy that question 😉

 Kinger's gear list:Kinger's gear list
Sony RX100 III Canon EOS M5 Samsung NX mini Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM +1 more
Kinger
Kinger Contributing Member • Posts: 529
Re: Here's a thought

nnowak wrote:

Kinger wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Of all of the posts in this discussion, yours are the only ones that have resorted to childish name calling and personal insults. If you want to talk about the M system, then maybe your posts should actually be about cameras instead of your personal issues. You would think that as a college professor, you would have learned more appropriate communication skills by now.

But to be fair, your comments were mostly meant to be antagonistic. At least that’s how they appear to me.

If that is your interpretation, then you completely misread my comments in this thread. My initial comments were based on simple equivalency calculations. The comparison could have been between a smartphone and an old Pentax DSLR with the FA 31mm f1.8. The resulting images would have been largely the same as well as my reaction.

Regardless of anyone's interpretation, name calling and insults should never be part of a reasoned, respectful, adult discussion.

Agree that there is no need for name calling or insults.

 Kinger's gear list:Kinger's gear list
Sony RX100 III Canon EOS M5 Samsung NX mini Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM +1 more
thajuice4me Forum Member • Posts: 66
Re: Stacking the deck
2

Alastair Norcross wrote:

nnowak wrote:

You are comparing the brightest EF-M lens to a relatively mediocre cell phone. There is roughly 6 stops difference between the two. Switch to a higher end and more modern smartphone and put one of the EF-M kit lenses on your M6, and the difference drops to 1.5 stops (or less). Throw in some computational wizardry like Google's Night Sight and the differences are even smaller.

Yes, the dedicated camera can produce the a better image. But the notion that the smartphone is utter garbage and the dedicated camera is infinitely superior is a gross exaggeration.

Nice strawman there. I never said a smartphone is garbage. I said it's still worth carrying a real camera. And it is. Much as you constantly like to pour cold water on anything remotely in support of the M system, and spread your gospel of doom and gloom, some people post on this forum because they genuinely enjoy using M cameras, and get great results from them. Every time I read one of your posts I wonder why on earth you bother reading and posting on this forum. Your constant negativity is a real pain even for those of us who only encounter it occasionally. You must be a real joy to have around at parties.

Well, he just expressed his honest opinion. I think you're being a bit overly sensitive to the words he used.

 thajuice4me's gear list:thajuice4me's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Canon EOS M6 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4 Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD Macro +2 more
Wildabobalore Regular Member • Posts: 276
Re: Better example
2

Wayne Larmon wrote:

I only use the Ms when I can't get a shot with the Pixel 2. Usually because of focal length reasons. And/or because of needing an EVF in the bright sunlight (which is a lack of technique on my part.)

I think you missed the point of the thread, no? The fact is OP carries an M camera everywhere because of the specific times that a phone camera won't cut it. Which would be the example OP posted.

...and that is also exactly the same parameters that you tried to state before you went into a two paragraph long brand-bashing diatribe.

 Wildabobalore's gear list:Wildabobalore's gear list
Fujifilm X70 Fujifilm XF10 Canon EOS M50 Canon EOS Rebel SL2 Canon EOS 450D +19 more
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 2,106
Re: Stacking the deck
2

thajuice4me wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

nnowak wrote:

You are comparing the brightest EF-M lens to a relatively mediocre cell phone. There is roughly 6 stops difference between the two. Switch to a higher end and more modern smartphone and put one of the EF-M kit lenses on your M6, and the difference drops to 1.5 stops (or less). Throw in some computational wizardry like Google's Night Sight and the differences are even smaller.

Yes, the dedicated camera can produce the a better image. But the notion that the smartphone is utter garbage and the dedicated camera is infinitely superior is a gross exaggeration.

Nice strawman there. I never said a smartphone is garbage. I said it's still worth carrying a real camera. And it is. Much as you constantly like to pour cold water on anything remotely in support of the M system, and spread your gospel of doom and gloom, some people post on this forum because they genuinely enjoy using M cameras, and get great results from them. Every time I read one of your posts I wonder why on earth you bother reading and posting on this forum. Your constant negativity is a real pain even for those of us who only encounter it occasionally. You must be a real joy to have around at parties.

Well, he just expressed his honest opinion. I think you're being a bit overly sensitive to the words he used.

That is also my way of reading nowaks words. "the notion that the smartphone is utterly garbage" isn't - as i read it - stating Alastair Norcross would have said the phone was garbage, and i also think it wasn't meant to suggest this.

Some persons prefer a more critical attitude, while other prefer harmony over being critical.

Maybe it could help if the topic starter says something about the goal of a topic. Is it meant as a discussion topic (arguments + critical attitude) or is it meant to share a positive experience (harmony + compliments and eventually some positive feedback)  with a M camera? In other topics the goal is more clear to me, but with this one it was maybe a bit confusing. This comment is not meant to blame the topic starter in any way for this.

-- hide signature --

If your facts are different we could save the peace just by calling it copy to copy variation.

Wayne Larmon Forum Pro • Posts: 10,352
Re: Better example

Wildabobalore wrote:

Wayne Larmon wrote:

I only use the Ms when I can't get a shot with the Pixel 2. Usually because of focal length reasons. And/or because of needing an EVF in the bright sunlight (which is a lack of technique on my part.)

I think you missed the point of the thread, no? The fact is OP carries an M camera everywhere because of the specific times that a phone camera won't cut it. Which would be the example OP posted.

...and that is also exactly the same parameters that you tried to state before you went into a two paragraph long brand-bashing diatribe.

My post was a response to the OPer saying

The phone photo I posted was actually far more like most phone photos I am shown than a much better one would be.

My objection was that the OP was claiming that the example he gave was the norm for smartphones.  I gave an example that showed the opposite: of a smartphone that produces images that are comparable to my Ms.

I also said that I also usually carry my Ms whenever it is feasible.  Demonstrating that current flagship phones produce image quality that is comparable to a SOTA M (albeit with the kit lens) isn't brand bashing.

I am happy with my Ms.  I will most likely buy one or two M lenses in the near future.  But we can't deny the performance of current smartphones.  The recently launched Pixel 3As show that flagship phone camera performance is now available in phones that are much cheaper.

Wayne

Sittatunga Senior Member • Posts: 1,341
Re: Better example

Wayne Larmon wrote:

Wildabobalore wrote:

Wayne Larmon wrote:

I only use the Ms when I can't get a shot with the Pixel 2. Usually because of focal length reasons. And/or because of needing an EVF in the bright sunlight (which is a lack of technique on my part.)

I think you missed the point of the thread, no? The fact is OP carries an M camera everywhere because of the specific times that a phone camera won't cut it. Which would be the example OP posted.

...and that is also exactly the same parameters that you tried to state before you went into a two paragraph long brand-bashing diatribe.

My post was a response to the OPer saying

The phone photo I posted was actually far more like most phone photos I am shown than a much better one would be.

My objection was that the OP was claiming that the example he gave was the norm for smartphones. I gave an example that showed the opposite: of a smartphone that produces images that are comparable to my Ms.

I also said that I also usually carry my Ms whenever it is feasible. Demonstrating that current flagship phones produce image quality that is comparable to a SOTA M (albeit with the kit lens) isn't brand bashing.

I am happy with my Ms. I will most likely buy one or two M lenses in the near future. But we can't deny the performance of current smartphones. The recently launched Pixel 3As show that flagship phone camera performance is now available in phones that are much cheaper.

Wayne

The 64Gb Pixel 3A is exactly the same price (£399) as the EOS M100 twin lens outfit with the 15-45mm and 22mm lenses. I know which one I'd prefer as I'm writing this on my phone.

OP Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 6,549
Re: Better example
2

Sittatunga wrote:

Wayne Larmon wrote:

Wildabobalore wrote:

Wayne Larmon wrote:

I only use the Ms when I can't get a shot with the Pixel 2. Usually because of focal length reasons. And/or because of needing an EVF in the bright sunlight (which is a lack of technique on my part.)

I think you missed the point of the thread, no? The fact is OP carries an M camera everywhere because of the specific times that a phone camera won't cut it. Which would be the example OP posted.

...and that is also exactly the same parameters that you tried to state before you went into a two paragraph long brand-bashing diatribe.

My post was a response to the OPer saying

The phone photo I posted was actually far more like most phone photos I am shown than a much better one would be.

My objection was that the OP was claiming that the example he gave was the norm for smartphones. I gave an example that showed the opposite: of a smartphone that produces images that are comparable to my Ms.

I also said that I also usually carry my Ms whenever it is feasible. Demonstrating that current flagship phones produce image quality that is comparable to a SOTA M (albeit with the kit lens) isn't brand bashing.

I am happy with my Ms. I will most likely buy one or two M lenses in the near future. But we can't deny the performance of current smartphones. The recently launched Pixel 3As show that flagship phone camera performance is now available in phones that are much cheaper.

Wayne

The 64Gb Pixel 3A is exactly the same price (£399) as the EOS M100 twin lens outfit with the 15-45mm and 22mm lenses. I know which one I'd prefer as I'm writing this on my phone.

I take it you mean you'd prefer the M100 for taking pictures, and the Pixel for writing forum posts. Good choice.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS M6 Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) +23 more
Sittatunga Senior Member • Posts: 1,341
Re: Better example

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

Wayne Larmon wrote:

Wildabobalore wrote:

Wayne Larmon wrote:

I only use the Ms when I can't get a shot with the Pixel 2. Usually because of focal length reasons. And/or because of needing an EVF in the bright sunlight (which is a lack of technique on my part.)

I think you missed the point of the thread, no? The fact is OP carries an M camera everywhere because of the specific times that a phone camera won't cut it. Which would be the example OP posted.

...and that is also exactly the same parameters that you tried to state before you went into a two paragraph long brand-bashing diatribe.

My post was a response to the OPer saying

The phone photo I posted was actually far more like most phone photos I am shown than a much better one would be.

My objection was that the OP was claiming that the example he gave was the norm for smartphones. I gave an example that showed the opposite: of a smartphone that produces images that are comparable to my Ms.

I also said that I also usually carry my Ms whenever it is feasible. Demonstrating that current flagship phones produce image quality that is comparable to a SOTA M (albeit with the kit lens) isn't brand bashing.

I am happy with my Ms. I will most likely buy one or two M lenses in the near future. But we can't deny the performance of current smartphones. The recently launched Pixel 3As show that flagship phone camera performance is now available in phones that are much cheaper.

Wayne

The 64Gb Pixel 3A is exactly the same price (£399) as the EOS M100 twin lens outfit with the 15-45mm and 22mm lenses. I know which one I'd prefer as I'm writing this on my phone.

I take it you mean you'd prefer the M100 for taking pictures, and the Pixel for writing forum posts. Good choice.

Actually I meant that I've got a perfectly good phone that was less than half the price of the Pixel and doesn't need replacing yet. When it's time, I might be looking at a Pixel 5A or whatever's around then. I'd rather have a phone with a good 5 megapixel camera, easily emailable photos and decent low light performance. That'sa phone camera I'd actually use.  Right now, I'd be better putting that sort of money into replacing my Windows 7 laptop.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads