# New Canon EOS M Specs



## sood1992 (Jul 22, 2012)

Canon is going to Launch a brand new Canon EOS M camera tomorrow along  with EF-M 22mm f/2 and EF-M 18-55 IS lens. It will also launch with a  new flash, the EX 90 and an EF lens adapter. Seems like a lot is coming  from Canon. 

Read More - New Canon EOS M Specs


----------



## sovietdoc (Jul 22, 2012)

It will be interesting to see this thing mounted onto a 800mm f/5.6....


----------



## usayit (Jul 22, 2012)

As someone who adopted mirror-less quite early, I'm excited to see more competition.

Now if only I can dig up that old ... very long... very heated thread which many members here eluded to mirror-less as a fad to be ignored.  Hmmm....


----------



## sovietdoc (Jul 22, 2012)

usayit said:


> As someone who adopted mirror-less quite early, I'm excited to see more competition.
> 
> Now if only I can dig up that old ... very long... very heated thread which many members here eluded to mirror-less as a fad to be ignored.  Hmmm....



I think eventually professional dslr's will be mirror-less and will have touch screens.  Touch screens will be probably coming out a lot sooner.


----------



## epistefiend (Jul 22, 2012)

I'm pretty Jelous of the 22mm f/2.0. I would be more excited if this were an EF or EF-S lens. The body looks very minimalist. I would have preferred to see something more along the lines of the G1X.


----------



## TheBiles (Jul 23, 2012)

sovietdoc said:
			
		

> I think eventually professional dslr's will be mirror-less and will have touch screens.  Touch screens will be probably coming out a lot sooner.



Mirrorless can't replace being able to look through an optical viewfinder.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 23, 2012)

sovietdoc said:
			
		

> I think eventually professional dslr's will be mirror-less and will have touch screens.  Touch screens will be probably coming out a lot sooner.



I don't. Touchscreen probably. But for working pros an OVF is a necessity.


----------



## usayit (Jul 23, 2012)

Technology and its impact is unpredictable...  often with a bad sense of humor.

I for one have a great want for an OVF.  Its one of the reasons why I shoot with rangefinders.   On the other hand, EVFs from the top mirrorless cameras are surprisingly usable with little to no refresh delay.   Even in the dark, they have the ability to boost the gain which does impact refresh rate but you can actually see slightly easier than with the naked eye.

The first micro 4 3 camera was only 5 years ago... give it some time.   We also had a bunch of members who claimed that micro 4/3 would never gain traction.   We all know that that is proven wrong.


----------



## usayit (Jul 23, 2012)

The more I read about this new Canon, the more I feel a bit disappointed.  I was expecting something closer to the long running and well designed G-series powershots.  Basically a G1x with an interchangeable lens mount.   I shot with the G1, G5, and G6 before heading towards Panasonic for my want for a high end P&S... they were always an impressive line that spoke to both the P&S and DSLR crowd.  Not too small.  Good layout.  Good features.  Good Image quality.  Viewfinder.  etc.   Much of the features that made the G-series successful are missing in this new EOS-M.  Its almost as if they are aiming towards the same audience as the S100... shooters that wouldn't place interchangeable lens mount as the highest priority nor care for the extra bulk over the current S100.    Its also way too small to really take advantage of some of the EF lenses even if adapted properly.

I am excited that they were able to create a hybrid AF comprising of both contrast and phase AF.    I don't see any place for an EVF attachment nor built-in... that's not good.


----------



## TheFantasticG (Jul 23, 2012)

I'm going to sell my 60D this weekend and put an order in for the EOS-M. It'll serve my needs just fine.


----------



## gsgary (Jul 23, 2012)

sovietdoc said:
			
		

> It will be interesting to see this thing mounted onto a 800mm f/5.6....



If you look in the right place you can see that


----------



## gsgary (Jul 23, 2012)

No veiwfinder so it is a big NO NO for me


----------



## TheFantasticG (Jul 23, 2012)

EOS M - Small and simple EOS - YouTube



Canon EOS M Mirrorless Camera Hands on First Look - YouTube



Canon EOS M first look preview - YouTube


I'm getting excited about getting it.


----------



## 3bayjunkie (Jul 23, 2012)

I dont even shoot with a digital camera so the thought of getting rid of the optical view finder is hard for me to imagine... Pixels and digital displays cant replace natural light and clearity

The canon eos 1v and nikon f6 are still in production so film is not dead!


----------



## Gaerek (Jul 24, 2012)

TheBiles said:


> sovietdoc said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is one of the biggest complaints from people who think mirrorless cameras are a, "to be ignored" fad. Yet most of them who complain have never actually looked through a good EVF. I've heard many say, "Live view on a DSLR is sluggish, so these mirrorless cameras must be bad too." The thing is, the EVF on the better mirrorless cameras (I'm thinking the EP-3 specifically) is actually quite good, and has several benefits over an OVF. Of course, I have no insight into this new Canon camera, but it certainly intrigues me. The only thing that was holding me back from purchasing a mirrorless camera was the fact that I'd have to give up my lens collection. Since this will mount EF and EF-S lenses, as long as it's a solid camera, I don't see any reason I won't be purchasing one in the near future. I'm not a working pro, and if the EVF is at least as good as the EP-3 (which I HAVE used), then it's more than enough camera for me. I'm tired of lugging around a huge camera that is only huge because it needs room for light to bounce around inside.


----------



## thestereoeffect (Jul 24, 2012)

sovietdoc said:
			
		

> I think eventually professional dslr's will be mirror-less and will have touch screens.  Touch screens will be probably coming out a lot sooner.



Doesn't the T4i have a touch screen?


----------



## TheFantasticG (Jul 24, 2012)

Yes, yes it does.


----------



## TheKenTurner (Jul 24, 2012)

Gaerek said:
			
		

> This is one of the biggest complaints from people who think mirrorless cameras are a, "to be ignored" fad. Yet most of them who complain have never actually looked through a good EVF. I've heard many say, "Live view on a DSLR is sluggish, so these mirrorless cameras must be bad too." The thing is, the EVF on the better mirrorless cameras (I'm thinking the EP-3 specifically) is actually quite good, and has several benefits over an OVF. Of course, I have no insight into this new Canon camera, but it certainly intrigues me. The only thing that was holding me back from purchasing a mirrorless camera was the fact that I'd have to give up my lens collection. Since this will mount EF and EF-S lenses, as long as it's a solid camera, I don't see any reason I won't be purchasing one in the near future. I'm not a working pro, and if the EVF is at least as good as the EP-3 (which I HAVE used), then it's more than enough camera for me. I'm tired of lugging around a huge camera that is only huge because it needs room for light to bounce around inside.



The EOS-M doesn't have any viewfinder...

-Ken Turner


----------



## unpopular (Jul 24, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> sovietdoc said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't think it much matters. The cost to manufacture a mirrorless with an EVF is going to be so attractive to camera manufacturers that I think in the long run that our hand will be tied. I've always though this was the real motivation behind Sony's EVF.

But I also have a hard time believing that with a sufficient resolution it would matter much, and mark my word, in two years we'll see 4mp EVF's showing up in hybrid finders.

---

I think that Canon may be trying to create a buzz with this model, delaying an NEX-7 competitor so that people get excited about it and say "oh, it'd be perfect if only it had a viewfinder!", then at some near point release one that does. I think Sony inadvertently did this with the NEX, and by the time the 7 came out people who bought it were already convinced by the platform, if only it had a viewfinder; once an NEX did, early sales were solid by early hype.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 24, 2012)

unpopular said:
			
		

> ... in two years we'll see 4mp EVF's showing up in hybrid finders.



Nope. NEVER going to happen.4 megapixel viewfinders? Ha! What a laugh! Just like those idiots that said this dangerous electricity was going to replace the kerosene lantern! Snort! And just like the way those fools claimed that these newfangled aeroplanes would replace the train! And this crazy tele-vision fad? Pshaw! Who wants to sit around and watch a tiny little box when you can go to the movies for 25 cents and have a great time and have fresh popcorn?


----------



## unpopular (Jul 24, 2012)

If god meant us to use electrical viewfinders, he wouldn't have given us pentaprisms!


----------



## rexbobcat (Jul 24, 2012)

The human eye can only resolve so much fine detail. I'm sure that 4MP in such a tiny space would be overkill.

On top of that, the EVF is just another electrical something-or-other that has the chance to crap out and degrade (hot/dead pixels).

I mean, if it was tried, true, and very very reliable then I might consider it. But I don't want one of the only analog parts of modern photography left to be taken over by another piece of digital technology, which has to be rationalized for WHY it's better.

I just don't understand why. I thought "what you see is what you get" is the best when it comes to a using a camera.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 24, 2012)

Typically solid state electronic equipment outlast mechanical equipment, I am unsure if this is true of EVFs. I agree that "what you see is what you get" is best, but I am sure that, and perhaps unfortunately, the economics will prevail. It's way cheaper to wire up a EVF to a sensor.


----------



## Gaerek (Jul 24, 2012)

TheKenTurner said:


> Gaerek said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Unfortunately, I hadn't actually look at the specs of the camera before I commented. Looks like I'll pass on this one, at least until there's a version with an actual viewfinder, or an accessory viewfinder, like on the Leica M and EP-3.



rexbobcat said:


> I mean, if it was tried, true, and very very reliable then I might consider it. But I don't want one of the only analog parts of modern photography left to be taken over by another piece of digital technology, which has to be rationalized for WHY it's better.



Although I would never say that an EVF is always better than an OVF, I would say there are several aspects that make it better, or at the very least, more useful in certain circumstances.

-Ability to "crop" the image in the viewfinder to check focus
-Better low light (OVF's are hard to see through in low light, and basically useless in extreme low light conditions. With an EVF, gain can be increased, albeit with additional noise, but you can actually "see" in the dark.
-Information can be overlaid on the scene (histo, etc) and in some cases can be customized to show only what you want to see through the VF.
-100% VF coverage, which most entry level DSLR's do not have (and is, at this point, what these mirrorless cameras are trying to appeal to)
-No mirror box in the camera, which gives you a camera less than half the size of a DSLR, with no noticeable difference in IQ, in relation to sensor size.

I'm not saying these are all deal breakers, or if they really appeal to everyone. But if you need a rationalization why they could be considered better, there are several reasons why. It's now looking a bit too early for me to adopt, but give it a few years, and the technology will be ready for prime time. Give me a camera that accepts the lenses I already own, has the same features of a DSLR, with an actual VF (electronic is fine), and I'll be buying one. I'm not a pro, and the OVF v. EVF debate is a no-brainer for me, if it means I don't have to lug a brick around anymore.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 24, 2012)

It is possible, although not specified, that the hot shoe could detect if a flash or EVF is attached, and change the behavior of the shoe accordingly. However, if the EOS-M doesn't have any way to facilitate an EVF, this platform DOA.


----------



## usayit (Jul 24, 2012)

I too was skeptical about the EVF.  After all, its the core reason why I choose to shoot with a rangefinder which is brighter than any prism.   I also rarely bought a DSLR without a prism as it bothered me after seeing the nice bright viewfinders of cameras of the film days.  The EVFs in early mirrorless were "adequate" but the latest are pretty darn good.  The Olympus EVF has more resolution than the top-tiered LCDs on both Nikon and Canon.... squished to the size of a postage stamp.   There's also the ability to boost brightness when the light is dim.  Not to mention more information that can be overlaid...  

Most are building their opinions on lowly cheap P&S experiences rather than a camera that truly has some of the latest technology behind their EVF.  Video guys have been using it for quite some time.

Why the concern over longevity?  Not too many of us have a digital camera nor intend on keeping one fore more than 10 years.

Derrel should remember a long thread we had over mirrorless... and how they would never gain traction among serious photographers... and look at this.. here we are.  Both of the big two trying to gain their own foothold in a supposedly fad ridden market.  Let's not forget that mirrorless is making a killing everywhere in the world except here in the US.


Don't under-estimate the progress of technology....


Oh.. touch screen... I've been ignoring mine until this past weekend when I found how fluid it is to simply touch the screen to change focus points.  I use the term "points" loosely as there are no AF points at all.... its completely infinite number of AF "locations".


----------



## Gaerek (Jul 25, 2012)

unpopular said:


> It is possible, although not specified, that the hot shoe could detect if a flash or EVF is attached, and change the behavior of the shoe accordingly. However, if the EOS-M doesn't have any way to facilitate an EVF, this platform DOA.



I hadn't seen any information relating to anything like this. I think it's a good way for Canon to get a foothold into the mirrorless category, but those of us who have already adopted EOS lenses who want a replacement for our DSLR are going to find this camera a bit inadequate. However, I imagine that many photographers will be looking to this camera as their "vacation" or everyday carry camera.

I remember the stink that was made when Popular Photography (not going to argue the merits of this magazine, but they certainly do have an influence on aspects of photography) said the 2008 Camera of the year was the Panasonic G1. Most people were saying the whole mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras were just a fad, and would be gone in a couple years. Here we are, 4 years later, and now the big two (Nikon and Canon) both have entries in this this category. And the cameras made today are far and away better than the G1. Imagine where this category of camera will be in another 4 years. Will it take over DSLRs? Who knows, only time will tell. The tech can only get better. And for those that say EVF's suck...go look through a good EVF, like a Leica M, or EP-3, and tell me that. Those EVFs are so clear, it's almost like looking through an OVF.


----------



## belial (Jul 26, 2012)

unpopular said:
			
		

> It is possible, although not specified, that the hot shoe could detect if a flash or EVF is attached, and change the behavior of the shoe accordingly. However, if the EOS-M doesn't have any way to facilitate an EVF, this platform DOA.



I'm thinking a ovf would be fine up there though. As someone who isn't sold on evf yet this is what I'd do.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 26, 2012)

I do admit, I often forget about AF, a dumb finder would be really cool on something like this.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jul 26, 2012)

Gaerek said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, I hadn't actually look at the specs of the camera before I commented. Looks like I'll pass on this one, at least until there's a version with an actual viewfinder, or an accessory viewfinder, like on the Leica M and EP-3.
> 
> Although I would never say that an EVF is always better than an OVF, I would say there are several aspects that make it better, or at the very least, more useful in certain circumstances.
> 
> ...



What I meant is that if it was truly better then you wouldn't need to explain why it's better.

Al those points you listed are all well and good, and some photographers probably find them worthwhile, but for me they just seem impractical.

It's kind of like liveview with current DSLRs. Yeah, it's neat and handy, but could I live without it and still do what I do? Of course.

I want to see what's actually through the viewfinder. I want to be able to cleanly frame my shot. I don't want a cluttered Ironman-esque screen displaying what it interprets as what's out there.


----------



## usayit (Jul 26, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> What I meant is that if it was truly better then you wouldn't need to explain why it's better.



This makes no logical sense.....  Everyone is introduced to a technology in some form... whether it be a friend, TV ad, or a demonstration.  If I went back in time and showed someone two strips of nylon cloth; one with tiny plastic loops and another fuzzy textured, laid them out on a table, how would they know it would change many products in the form of velcro?    An explanation of the benefits of medication for sickness automatically deem medication not truly better?




> Al those points you listed are all well and good, and some photographers probably find them worthwhile, but for me they just seem impractical.
> 
> It's kind of like liveview with current DSLRs. Yeah, it's neat and handy, but could I live without it and still do what I do? Of course.
> 
> I want to see what's actually through the viewfinder. I want to be able to cleanly frame my shot. I don't want a cluttered Ironman-esque screen displaying what it interprets as what's out there.



The viewfinder LCD and EVF on most (if not all mirrorless cameras) is highly configurable.  You can turn everything off if you wish and have a completely un-cluttered view.   You can selectively choose what information is presented or not...    Unfortunately, most people's idea of using an EVF or LCD for framing is stemmed from the awful experience of doing so on a P&S.... the difference between that and the mirror-less today is like night and day.


----------



## belial (Jul 26, 2012)

To put my nose in the evf I'm currently indifferent. I love ovf. It was one of my primary reasons for warning a dslr in the first place. I believe eventually evf will replace ovf but I'm hopin it doesn't or that canon and Nikon at least keep ovf options out until the tech is truly ready. I have no problem moving up in tech but would rather stay tried and true for as long as its practical. That's just my $0.02. As I said in the other thread I do want one of these new canons. Looks good to me. Throw a dumb view finder on top and I'm ready to rock.


----------



## sovietdoc (Jul 27, 2012)

No matter how awesome the screen is, it will never feel the same as just looking through optics.


----------



## belial (Jul 30, 2012)

sovietdoc said:
			
		

> No matter how awesome the screen is, it will never feel the same as just looking through optics.



That's why I say put a ovf on the hotshoe. It won't be perfect but should still work well.


----------



## Alex_B (Jul 30, 2012)

sovietdoc said:


> I think eventually professional *dslr*'s will be mirror-less and will have touch screens. Touch screens will be probably coming out a lot sooner.



But then it would not be a *dSLR *anymore, but a *dSL *


----------

