first pic of canon mirrorless?

[gmrza]

I forgot to mention. What if this camera is jpg only?!

That is an entirely realistic possibility.  If that is the case, I won't be buying it.  Canon did make the mistake of taking RAW capability away from the G series.  I think there was a slump in G series sales when they did that.

[paul13walnut5]

@AvTvM

we = all Canonians interested. We are many.   

If you say so, I've only been using the EOS system since the 1000fn back in 1991 or something similar, so relatively late to the party.

And all I want for Christmas is something small that will work with my good lenses when i want it to, and with a tiny wee pancake when i don't.  By work I mean manual controls and video.

Really don't see the point of the M mount on a canon camera...   especially if you aren't going to use the Leica lenses on it...

Surely the Canonians you claim to speak on behalf of would like something not so 'overpriced or outdaten'(sic) as a system built round a 1950's mount...   

If the canonians wanted a 1950's mount they would have switched to Nikon, surely?

[paul13walnut5]

@msowsun

Are you joking?

If not..... This camera has a Canon EF-M mount, not a Leica M mount. It is a new mount designed specifically for a new mirror-less camera called the "EOS M". 

No.  Have you read back a few posts to get the context?  If not, please do so.

I am in no way whatsoever advocating an M mount for a canon camera, and am fully aware that the photographs of the leaked 'EOS-M' doesn't feature an M mount.

AvTvM seems to be suggesting this as a way forward, I am disagreeing.

I guess Monday will give us all lots of answers.

[AvTvM]

If not..... This camera has a Canon EF-M mount, not a Leica M mount. It is a new mount designed specifically for a new mirror-less camera called the "EOS M".

I for one am not joking. :-)

I still would like a hi-end FF mirrorless "with everything": very compact fully weathersealed body, excellent sensor, very fast phase-detect AF on the sensor,  and an electrified Leica M-mount which would be both compatible with manual focus M-Mount lenses as well as with new nanocoated AF-lenses build specifically for it.  At the price of say a 5D3, rather than a Leica M9 (which I do not want for a number of reasaons, most importantly that itr is a manual-focus only mechanical rangefinder, and the only thing digital being its sensor).

Canon could give me that ... if they only wanted. But, they do not want. Unfortunately.
On the other hand: I do not want consumer-oriented viewfinderless point and shoots like this EF-M. Even if it has an APS-C sensor and not only a puny G1C 4:3 sensor. If Canon won't serve me

I wont buy their crap. As easy as that. Somebody will eventually build the camera I really want.

[Otara]

18-55mm has IS ('Image') written on barrel, strongly suggests no in-body IS?  And greater chance of EF/EF-S compatibility somehow. 

Otara

[paul13walnut5]

@AvTvM

In this thread a while back the spectre of a digital Contax G was breifly risen.

How about a digital G?

Not being facetious, but I don't think 'canonians' want such a system,  I would want a digital version of the G2, but it would be a different tool for a different job.  I don't use canon memory cards.  I don't use canon tripods.  Hell, I don't always use Canon batteries..

Would it be against the doctrine of the canonians to buy off brand, if somebody else makes what 'canonians' actually want?

[zim]

If not..... This camera has a Canon EF-M mount, not a Leica M mount. It is a new mount designed specifically for a new mirror-less camera called the "EOS M".

I for one am not joking. :-)

I still would like a hi-end FF mirrorless "with everything": very compact fully weathersealed body, excellent sensor, very fast phase-detect AF on the sensor,  and an electrified Leica M-mount which would be both compatible with manual focus M-Mount lenses as well as with new nanocoated AF-lenses build specifically for it.  At the price of say a 5D3, rather than a Leica M9 (which I do not want for a number of reasaons, most importantly that itr is a manual-focus only mechanical rangefinder, and the only thing digital being its sensor).

Canon could give me that ... if they only wanted. But, they do not want. Unfortunately.
On the other hand: I do not want consumer-oriented viewfinderless point and shoots like this EF-M. Even if it has an APS-C sensor and not only a puny G1C 4:3 sensor. If Canon won't serve me

I wont buy their crap. As easy as that. Somebody will eventually build the camera I really want.

simply correct!

[gmrza]

I still would like a hi-end FF mirrorless "with everything": very compact fully weathersealed body, excellent sensor, very fast phase-detect AF on the sensor,  and an electrified Leica M-mount which would be both compatible with manual focus M-Mount lenses as well as with new nanocoated AF-lenses build specifically for it.  At the price of say a 5D3, rather than a Leica M9 (which I do not want for a number of reasaons, most importantly that itr is a manual-focus only mechanical rangefinder, and the only thing digital being its sensor).

Canon could give me that ... if they only wanted. But, they do not want. Unfortunately.
On the other hand: I do not want consumer-oriented viewfinderless point and shoots like this EF-M. Even if it has an APS-C sensor and not only a puny G1C 4:3 sensor. If Canon won't serve me

I wont buy their crap. As easy as that. Somebody will eventually build the camera I really want.

As has been pointed out, it looks like the diameter of the EF-M mount will accomodate a 24x36mm sensor.  I don't think the technology is there yet to accomodate all the needs of a user of a full frame mirrorless camera, but I think the balance of probability is that some day we will see it.  For now, you are better served with a DSLR.  Give it 5 years, and things will look very different, the technology required to deliver in-sensor PDAF and a decent EVF will have evolved.  Electronic shutters will probably also develop a lot more in the next few years.

[AvTvM]

@AvTvM

In this thread a while back the spectre of a digital Contax G was breifly risen.
How about a digital G?

No. The G2 was still a mechanical rangefinder cam - as outdated as any other rangefinder since the 1960s. Only addition was AF. AT the expense of a very limited lens selection, due to lack of M-mount compatibility (back then, Leica M-mount was still patent protected, today it is no longer).

I do NOT want an old-world rangefinder cam. I want a natively digital, hi-performance cam with TTL-viewfinder. And I want it so good that it could fully replace a 5D3 (not necessarily a 1D X though) and add a number of advantages on top: no noise, no vibration, no more mechanical works.

That means:
* state-of-the-art EVF or a really really clever hybrid EVF/OVF.
* electronic shutter with sync times right to 1/8000s.
* Hi-performance AF-system = in-sensor-phase detect AF ... as introduced in Rebel T4i/650D, but even better
* sizewise I would like it as compact as a Minolta CLE.       
* Pricewise like a 5D3
 
I know, both Canon and Nikon will not announce it today. But maybe in time before my 7D wears out. :-)

[paul13walnut5]

@AvTvM

* sizewise I would like it as compact as a Minolta CLE.   

As about as compact as the later (and inferior M6 TTL) then?  Or did you forget that the CLE was also a rangefinder?  A slight digression, but IMHO any Leica film body user who doesn't use a CLE, isn't interested in photographs from their Leicas, just Leicas.

It's one of my favourite all time cameras.

But then...

I'm not rejecting rangefinders.  A camera 'like' the Contax G2 but with a sensor and a way of using EF lenses would be my ideal.

I suspect though that the high end EOS-M which will inevitably come later on, will be as good as it will get for me.

I don't have low aspirations.  Just I already have great cameras. The Mirrorless EOS is only adding to my party.

The fondu set, party 7 and entertainment centre are already set.

[DarkKnightNine]

I hate that Canon seems to lack any innovation of late yet they want to charge high premiums for giving us something that the rest of the industry has already provided except with a Canon badge. The entire concept is insulting to us as their loyal fan base. If it weren't for the fact that I love Canon lenses, I would have moved on years ago as there definitely better bodies on the market.

I hate everything about this camera because I imagine what it could have been. There is no reason Canon (or even Nikon) can't give us a Leica M9 killer (a FF mirrorless camera, with a complete lens system) at a decent price. It may cannibalize their low end DSLR market, but their higher end models like the 5D Mark III and 1DX would still sell well. Besides the industry is moving toward mirrorless anyways so lower end DSLRs have a short life span if market indicators are so be believed.

Canon tries so hard to be like Apple (with secrecy etc...), but they are a far cry from it. Apple skates to where the puck is going and waits for the market to catch up (which is why they charge a premium for their products). Canon skates over the lines that other players have already skated in search for the puck, yet they want to charge a premium because they simply stamped a Canon badge on retreaded tech.

This camera is fugly and it looks like the specs and usability won't be anything spectacular either. I could probably get better pictures out of a 60D with a kit lens, so this camera IMO is useless. If Canon wanted to enter the mirrorless market, they should have done in a way that they could have added something to it or reinvent it. That's what Apple would have done. A FF M9 killer would have made sense. This camera is just a useless waste of time and R&D.

[DarkKnightNine]

Who is this camera geared towards? Point and shooters that want to feel like they have a small dsrl?

People who do't want to lug around 100lbs of camera gear to take pictures that aren't noisy and lacking in quality.

A 60D and the EF-S 18-200mm IS will accomplish just about the same. There's no need for this camera.

[paul13walnut5]

@DarkKnightNine

There is no reason Canon (or even Nikon) can't give us a Leica M9 killer:

Other than it's not their established market segment, and that the folk who would already buy rangefinders already buy leica rangefinders.

They are as different as chalk and cheese.

I want a mirrorless that is as versatile as a DSLR.

Apple skates to where the puck is going and waits for the market to catch up (which is why they charge a premium for their products).

No. they charge a premium for unique exclusive OS and user experience.  Quite often they get it wrong.  Quite often they dumb down.  I'm an FCP user and will never be an FCPX user.   So my next NLE is Adobe Premiere.  My next platform, unless Apple GROW THE 'PUCK' UP is a PC.  If apple don't want to give me a decent FCP, or a mac that can run Production suite decently, then they become the weakest link in my chain.

Adobe are doing great things.  Flash is dead. But  Apple have smelt smart device gold.  Apple will not be relevant in production terms in 5 years.  Apple will have went from equipment for creators to equipment for consumers,

Canon skates over the lines that other players have already skated in search for the puck, yet they want to charge a premium because they simply stamped a Canon badge on retreaded tech.

USM lenses.  Best AF for last 20 years?  First affordable DSLR.  First Affordable FF?  First affordable 20MP+ camera? 

This camera is just a useless waste of time and R&D.

Nah, it will sell to loads of folk who trust canon but who aren't that into the specifics of working a camera.

It might not be what the enthusisast want. But they are a small segment already served well by the EOS range.

The PRo's wont want it. (No grip)

Lets face it.  A mirrorless camera that respects legacy users.  Olympus PEN (not OM)  Nikon 1(Not F)  Sony NEX (Not MAF) Samsung (Not K) Pentax Q (not K)   if the canon can take a fully functional EF lens, even via an adaptor then it is ahead of everybody else (Sony get close, but no cigar)

[paul13walnut5]

@DarkKnightNine

A 60D and the EF-S 18-200mm IS will accomplish just about the same. There's no need for this camera.

Sandra Bullocks.

An EF-s 18-200 IS accomplishes very little except convenience.
And -sorry 60D owners- a 60D doesn't tick that many unique boxes either.

Mediocre paired with mediocre makes no benchmark, especially at the mediocre value each offers individually, let alone combined.  A camera trying to be for everyman ending up being for no man.

[DarkKnightNine]

If not..... This camera has a Canon EF-M mount, not a Leica M mount. It is a new mount designed specifically for a new mirror-less camera called the "EOS M".

I for one am not joking. :-)

I still would like a hi-end FF mirrorless "with everything": very compact fully weathersealed body, excellent sensor, very fast phase-detect AF on the sensor,  and an electrified Leica M-mount which would be both compatible with manual focus M-Mount lenses as well as with new nanocoated AF-lenses build specifically for it.  At the price of say a 5D3, rather than a Leica M9 (which I do not want for a number of reasaons, most importantly that itr is a manual-focus only mechanical rangefinder, and the only thing digital being its sensor).

Canon could give me that ... if they only wanted. But, they do not want. Unfortunately.
On the other hand: I do not want consumer-oriented viewfinderless point and shoots like this EF-M. Even if it has an APS-C sensor and not only a puny G1C 4:3 sensor. If Canon won't serve me

I wont buy their crap. As easy as that. Somebody will eventually build the camera I really want.

I'm certainly with you on that. Not so sure about the M mount, but the rest of the specs are dead on to what I would also like to see from a large optical company like Canon. Especially since they had years to evaluate the market and produce something truly fantastic. This camera is just ridiculous as an entry to an already well established market.