Again, nobody is surprised to see you bashing Canon's products. As usual you don't prove your point to why say it's a failure. It's like you didn't get the idea of this product. It's a consumer camera providing high margins for Canon. A great platform for them to start developing a whole new series of lenses for. I would say it was smart of them to start by launching the expected high volume model ahead of any higher end product. They get the word out, they get to sell a lot of lenses going with it and finance further development for this platform.
Canon being the dominant player in the camera market will have resources to bring to market a number of interesting products should they see this segment grow further.
I think I'm going to have to side with Ricku on this one. Canon went the aps-c route, which is better than another company that I won't mention, but it's still something that's been around for a while. So now we're stuck with something that has specific lenses that won't be of any use to a full-frame sensored mirrorless if they choose to go down that route in the future.
Part of being the best camera manufacturer in the world, is using your dominance in the industry to bring innovation and new ideas to the table that your competitors simply can't afford to compete with. Canon could have easily churned out a mirrorless with a 5d mark ii-like sensor in it with a similar body style to the EOS-M, and kept it priced competitively. Sure it isn't necessarily the epitome of innovation since Leica has been doing it for years, but at least it would be light years ahead of Canon's competitors. And don't tell me the glass would be way more expensive - there are plenty of good cheap Canon full-frame lenses, they could easily make new ones for a mirrorless.
It's not like the EOS-M is a bad camera, it's the what-if that's disappointing.
Logged
