.. the one you have with you.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
The 100D still bigger than the OMD. Especially with when you attach a big lens on it.
I don't see the 100d succeeding. DSLR's have their strengths and Canon should focus on that. Things like ergonomics, functionality and autofocus. The 100D isn't good at these things and isn't that compact either. What's the point?
How can you say that? It's small but it can still be very usable for people with small hands. When it comes to functionality, what do you mean? I think creative modes etc will be very functional for its' target market. Autofocus- compared to what?
+1 however, the above comment regarding the 35mm f/2 lens is valid. A similarly sized camera with exchangeable lenses though ...There should be an RX1 variant with 24-105 F4/F2.8 lens. Add a battery grip like the Fuji XPRO and this would be almost perfect for most usage. The 35mm even if it's F2 isn't that interesting enough for its price of 3K.
A lens like that would be huge and defeats the whole purpose of the camera.
There should be an RX1 variant with 24-105 F4/F2.8 lens. Add a battery grip like the Fuji XPRO and this would be almost perfect for most usage. The 35mm even if it's F2 isn't that interesting enough for its price of 3K.
Like all other companies Canon will place the M cameras in their lineup in such a way that they won't cannibalize anything else. This means that - even if they could make it so - the M series will never be as good as a DSLR except possibly at the low end DSLR, high end M. Canon probably decided to do the line because of competitor pressure, and it provides a stepping off point into DSLR's.
So for an existing DSLR owner why would we get a M, other than for the cool factor? As a smaller body complement to our existing system. We can use our existing lenses, but if we do so then it kind of defeats the purpose of having a smaller complement to the system. Anything above the 40mm pancake will be a monster on that body, and you have to use an adaptor.
So ... using it for it's best purpose, as a small side camera for those times you can't bring a DSLR, look at this
Here we have a DSLR with a pancake next to the M. Sure the M is smaller and lighter, but is it that smaller? I see maybe an extra inch vertically and horizontally at maximum. Indeed, when I put the shorty-40 on my 5DmkII I have a really tiny, lightweight camera. I barely notice it, and I have the full power of the existing DSLR (speed, focus, IQ, features, etc). I don't have a hugely quiet body, but if I had a 5DMKIII then I could use quiet shutter mode.
So ... EOS-M isn't for me. The small reduction in size isn't large enough to warrant the price tag and extra equipment. For the cost of an EOS-M you could get a duo of pancakes, the 40mm and Voightlander 20mm.
I got the Fuji x100 as a side camera for those times when a DSLR wouldn't work. There are a few occasions where it's great, so small and unobtrusive (and quiet) that the DSLR would have been too much. Most of the time though it sits unused.
Actually they are called focal reducers. They have been around for some time typically used on telescopes and spotting scopes. While they say they can correct for aberrations you can be sure that wont be the case with anything but one lens. Further it's highly unlikely that thy would improve the mtf and in all likelihood would make it worse.
It's a cool gimmick but just like extenders you won't get something for nothing. If it were that easy we would have extenders that would improve resolution as well.
We all know you just don't read online chat rooms to select the best brands of canvas, oils and brushes, and once obtained, just sit down and fiddle with them for a while and great paintings pop out. You have to know what you want to paint.
You don't research clay and tools, buy them and have sculptures spring forth.