October 25, 2014, 09:53:12 AM

Author Topic: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]  (Read 27988 times)

Budka

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #15 on: July 07, 2013, 09:14:01 PM »
They won't be $299, that's for dang sure.

That's right. Surely the new version will cost the same what the original EOS-M Kit at launch: $ 800.
Maybe $749 because the "focusgate" bad press.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #15 on: July 07, 2013, 09:14:01 PM »

bvukich

  • Spam Assassin
  • Administrator
  • 5D Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 733
    • View Profile
    • My (sparse) ZenFolio Site
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #16 on: July 07, 2013, 09:32:07 PM »

"Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"

That is something you hear about more in astronomy.  But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting.  A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100.  Count on the Canon being $300, maybe.  Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections. 

Let's see -- a .8 reducer would make the 85 1.8 a 68 1.4.  But the efl would still be a bit over 100mm because of the crop factor.   This sounds intriguing, but will probably not be inexpensive.

A reducer factor of 0.63 would restore EF lenses to their full frame optical values. (0.63 = 1/1.6).  I wonder if that's it....

I would expect a factor of .707 (sqrt(2)/2) mainly because it would be an even 1 stop difference, whereas a factor of .63 comes out to a very odd 5/4ths stops.

85/1.8 would become a 60/1.3
24-70/2.8 would become 17-50/2
70-200/4 would become 50-140/2.8

I think that would be enough to make focal lengths that are only so-so on crop (24-anything) quite attractive.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 09:34:02 PM by bvukich »

FunPhotons

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 405
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #17 on: July 07, 2013, 09:35:42 PM »
I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.

I guess I was spot on with that prediction.

Sounds spot off, to me. Maybe I'm biased because I bought one for $299. But, if this rumor is true (it's CR1, just the new 100-400 has been for what, 4 years?), the next M will be an 18 MP minor update (T5i/SL1 sensor), and the 20 MP dual pixel CMOS will follow that...but when?  And 'aimed at the FF Canon shooter' sounds like a $900-1000 camera, to me.  So, $299 really doesn't sound 'silly' especially when the camera + 22mm pancake only costs $85 more than the 22mm pancake alone.  That way, the next M can be bought with the kit zoom (since the best way to buy a kit lens is in a kit), and even selling the body for $150 you'd come out ahead...  Or you'd have a cheap body for IR conversion - one almost ideally suited for it as any lens can be used.

Just my $0.02 (or $299, as the case may be).

I agree. The EOS M now for $299 is a steal, with the new firmware it's a highly capable camera in a small package, and it works with my existing system (flash, lenses, GPS). I've got a couple S100's which are going to probably be retired due to this camera. Sure new Mirrorless will come, who cares? I can upgrade later.

eric_ykchan

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #18 on: July 07, 2013, 09:39:46 PM »
A "basic" model more basic than the current EOS-M? Will Canon sell the "basic" model at USD200?

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14752
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #19 on: July 07, 2013, 09:47:51 PM »
A "basic" model more basic than the current EOS-M? Will Canon sell the "basic" model at USD200?

Of course not, because it'll have the NEW (to mirrorless) Hybrid CMOS II sensor (aka the T5i/SL1 sensor). Plus a new scene mode or two.  ::)
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

neech7

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #20 on: July 07, 2013, 09:52:44 PM »

"Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"

That is something you hear about more in astronomy.  But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting.  A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100.  Count on the Canon being $300, maybe.  Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections. 

Let's see -- a .8 reducer would make the 85 1.8 a 68 1.4.  But the efl would still be a bit over 100mm because of the crop factor.   This sounds intriguing, but will probably not be inexpensive.

A reducer factor of 0.63 would restore EF lenses to their full frame optical values. (0.63 = 1/1.6).  I wonder if that's it....

The 10-22 is an EF-S lens. It looks like this would only be for EF lenses only. I think you are right on the 0.63 reducer, though. I'm excited for that. The EOS-M just gets more and more appealing.

Agreed -- I got to thinking about it and was about to follow up with a post saying that it likely be EF only because it would need the extra clearance.   I also would like to revise my price guess: this will be marketed as a piece of pro gear -- a Canon teleconverter runs about $450 -- so that would likely be the ballpark for the reducer -- $450 - $500.   I hope it's closer to the first guess, though!

It isn't a matter of clearance, it's how large an image circle the lens throws onto the sensor. With an EF lens, the adapter shrinks the image from 43mm diameter to about 27.6mm. An EF-S lens already has a (nominal) image circle of 27.6mm so shouldn't be reduced more.

Exactly. EF-S lenses can never be FL reduced for EF-M because they are both APS-C. What is there to reduce when both sensors are exactly the same size?

If the FL reducer part of the rumor is true, I suspect Metabones finally got Canon to buy or license what they have to offer.

But what does that leave this video, I wonder: SpeedBooster For Eos M

unfocused

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2189
    • View Profile
    • Unfocused: A photo website
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #21 on: July 07, 2013, 10:08:16 PM »
Why is it that people never seem to get that retailers are not Canon and an individual retailers pricing decision often occurs independent of Canon (or any other manufacturer).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Fact: Canon is not offering the EOS M for $299.
Fact: There is no rebate currently offered for the EOS-M, which means no enforcement of minimum advertised pricing.
Fact: B&H offered the camera for $299.
Fact: We don't know why B&H made this offer.
Fact: Adorama and Amazon are major competitors with B&H.
Fact: Adorama and Amazon matched B&H's price.
Fact: We don't know why Adorama and Amazon matched B&H's price, but we can speculate it has something to do with the competitive marketplace.
Fact: Eventually, the EOS-M will be replaced.

Assuming any relationship between the last fact and all those preceding, without correcting for all of the other variables, is simply sloppy reasoning.

pictures sharp. life not so much. www.unfocusedmg.com

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #21 on: July 07, 2013, 10:08:16 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14752
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #22 on: July 07, 2013, 10:13:21 PM »
Assuming any relationship between the last fact and all those preceding, without correcting for all of the other variables, is simply...

Going to be done be nearly everyone because a) it's human nature, and/or b) it's just plain fun.

 :P
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

preppyak

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 788
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #23 on: July 07, 2013, 10:18:39 PM »

"Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"

That is something you hear about more in astronomy.  But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting.  A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100.  Count on the Canon being $300, maybe.  Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections. 
Am I right in thinking that such a reducer would also increase the effective light-gathering capability of a lens, as the same image will be projected on a smaller area?  This would mean an f/2.8 lens could behave something like an f/2.2 lens (depending on efficiency) when mounted to the reducer (in terms of light gathering).
This already exists, so, you can see what it would essentially do: http://www.metabones.com/buy-speed-booster

So, for the EF to NEX one, it makes the lens .71x wider while increasing the aperture by a stop (technically a little more). It essentially creates a full-frame approximation while using an adapter and APS-C sensor. There would be some short-comings (AF being one, I would imagine), but a great combo for landscape and video no doubt. The Metabones one is all the rage with people shooting on GH2's and GH3's

As you can see, the price is as much as a mirrorless body. Can't imagine Canon selling it as a loss-leader, so, expect it to be $5-600 if it's as good as the Metabones one.

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4195
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #24 on: July 07, 2013, 10:47:18 PM »
To be able to use current EF and/or EF-S lenses is a nice feature, however, I still want pancake lenses to go with mirrorless cameras.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 10:53:23 PM by Dylan777 »
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 16-35L f4 IS -- 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

infared

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 961
  • Kodak Brownie!
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2013, 11:05:30 PM »
I agree, something to reduce the image circle from a full-frame EF lens to match the M sensor size makes the most sense I think.  This also tallies in with the suggestion in the original rumour that it will be aimed at the full-frame Canon shooter -- focal lengths would remain approximately the same.

This has certainly been one of the big reasons I haven't snapped up the current EOS-M at the bargain price -- I don't want to have to duplicate wide-angle lenses.

Am I right in thinking that such a reducer would also increase the effective light-gathering capability of a lens, as the same image will be projected on a smaller area?  This would mean an f/2.8 lens could behave something like an f/2.2 lens (depending on efficiency) when mounted to the reducer (in terms of light gathering).

Hopefully it will be a speed booster, i.e. reducing the effective f-stop and image circle of the lens...no?
5D Mark III, Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Canon 17mm f/4L TS-E, Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS, 21mm f/2.8 Zeiss, Sigma 35mm f/1.4, 24-70mm f/2.8 II, 50mm f/1.4 Sigma Art, 85mm f/1.2L, 100mm f/2.8L Macro,70-200mm f/2.8L IS II...1.4x converter III, and some other stuff.....

justsomedude

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 345
  • 5D3, 6D and 7D2
    • View Profile
    • AK Photo - Denver Photographer
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2013, 11:16:06 PM »
Heh.

I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.

I guess I was spot on with that prediction.

 8)

How is paying $300 for a mirrorless with DSLR IQ and a small, fast, and by all accounts, sharp prime silly?  That there would be an improved successor is blatantly obvious. But you're the Man.

In my opinion the EOS-M is not worthy of its price tag due to its poor AF, even at $299.  Opinions vary.  And people can buy in to first generation gear; it's their money - their choice.  They know the risks going in.  And when there's a fire sale, it's pretty telling that the new technology (ie, dual-pixel AF) just made the previous generation obsolete.

Don't be mad. 

 :-[
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 11:18:46 PM by justsomedude »

adhocphotographer

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
    • An ad hoc photographer
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2013, 11:38:49 PM »
To be able to use current EF and/or EF-S lenses is a nice feature, however, I still want pancake lenses to go with mirrorless cameras.

+1...  being able to attach you EF/Ef-S lenses to it is great indeed, and a feature that was required, but equally (or more so) is the need for smaller, lighter lenses to go with the smaller lighter body... I want a pancake feast...  preferably EF!!!  :D Bring out pancakes at all the physically available focus lengths, no matter how odd (40mm wasn't exactly normal)!
5D MkIII & 100D
17-40L, 24L II, 24-105L, 70-200L, 500L II
-------www.adhocphotographer.com--------

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2013, 11:38:49 PM »

kennephoto

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #28 on: July 07, 2013, 11:51:51 PM »
Heh.

I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.

I guess I was spot on with that prediction.

 8)

How is paying $300 for a mirrorless with DSLR IQ and a small, fast, and by all accounts, sharp prime silly?  That there would be an improved successor is blatantly obvious. But you're the Man.

In my opinion the EOS-M is not worthy of its price tag due to its poor AF, even at $299.  Opinions vary.  And people can buy in to first generation gear; it's their money - their choice.  They know the risks going in.  And when there's a fire sale, it's pretty telling that the new technology (ie, dual-pixel AF) just made the previous generation obsolete.

Don't be mad. 

 :-[

Cheaper than my 600$ iPhone, more portable than a 5d that's why I bought one. I can make decent photos with an iPhone and better ones with a 5d but I get nervous walking around with my 5d I won't cry as much if my 300 dollar camera gets stolen. So congrats to the happy people that got a great deal on a great camera!
Canon 5d Mark II Canon 1D classic EOSM 20-35 2.8L 50 1.2L 135 2.0L 80-200 2.8L 40 Pancake and a bunch of old film cameras

dswtan

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #29 on: July 08, 2013, 12:15:45 AM »
In my opinion the EOS-M is not worthy of its price tag due to its poor AF
Did you miss the whole firmware upgrade news recently perhaps, fixing the AF?
http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/the-new-eos-m-firmware-coming-soon/
http://500px.com/dswtan  |  5D3, 7D, IR 5D2, IR M, G15

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« Reply #29 on: July 08, 2013, 12:15:45 AM »