July 29, 2014, 09:15:03 AM

Author Topic: Canon EOS M Specs  (Read 31344 times)


canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #120 on: July 23, 2012, 12:59:49 AM »

unadog

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 78
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #121 on: July 23, 2012, 01:22:32 AM »
Anybody going to get one to try out?  It's fairly cheap, $799.

Ordered!

I have a Canon T4i.  This is a perfect second camera, especially for video.

I am in the process of paring my 14+ Canon lenses down to 5 or 6. 

I am going to go with the 22 2.0, 40 2.8, and 85 1.8 for primes.  (From: 24 2.8, 45 TS-E, 50 1.8, 85 1.2, 90 TS-E, Contax 28 mm)

For zooms, I am going with the 18-135 STM for video, along with the 24-70 2.8 II (for absolute highest quality on zoom, I use that lens 80% of teh time), and the 70-200 4.0  (sold the 70-200 2.8 II because it is so heavy.)

I am very happy with the T4i. It has basically the same image that my $8,000 Canon 1DsII had in 2004.

Yes, the Exmor has a bit more DR at lower ISO's.  But if you are posting in sRGB mode you are never going to see it. Even with prints you are compressing the DR beyond what the Canon captures, much less the Sony.

I am perfectly happy with the Canon sensors.  I have been a pro photog for 30+ years, retired now so downsizing to prosumer level.

Great tools we have today! Now we just need a few video firmware tweaks this fall, either from Canon, or Magic Lantern.

Have fun!
Michael

RGomezPhotos

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
    • Ricardo Gomez Photography
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #122 on: July 23, 2012, 01:50:58 AM »
I have to say, I really don't understand the mirrorless DSLR concept. Who buys these things?

Also - is there a reason why Canon does not offer 720 at 30p video on any of their cameras? I don't need 1080, but I don't want 60p for some shots. Plus I would think you can shoot more on a card at 720/30.

The concept is simple, its a middle camera between point and shoot and DSLR with some good points of both, and a few not so good ones like poor or no viewfinders.
So far this year (Thru May), $42.9 million U.S. dollars worth of mirrorless have been shipped.  ( http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/dizital.html )
So its a step up for P&S users.  DSLR sales are rising dramatically this year, while P&S sales numbers are falling slightly.  This likely means that many users are going for mirrorless rather than a P&S.


I'd been trying to figure it an explanation to mirrorless and this does it. Kinda.  I haven't seen mirrorless cameras that offer picture quality or size-savings that would justify the price difference. But camera decisions are based so much on personal vibes. So if it works for you. Cool.  Me, I'd rather just use a great P&S like the G12 or Lumix before whipping out the DSLR.  Mirrorless just doesn't offer enough for me for the price and size increase.
EOS 5D MKII & 50D, Zeiss 50mm f1.4
www.ricardogomezphotography.com

peederj

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #123 on: July 23, 2012, 02:10:41 AM »
It's more expensive to get one of these (with the 22mm pancake and the EF adapter...$1000) than the superior Rebel T4i (with its kit) at $930 if you want EF lens support.

What does this buy you over the Rebel, sizewise? Nothing. The Rebel has an articulated screen, a viewfinder for sunny days, 9 cross-type AF points, better balance weight and grip for bigger EF lenses, no need for a lens mount adpater, and not much harder to place in a camera bag (as the EOS M will need since it does not fit into a pocket).

I think this is Canon simply responding to trends, some not very bright people want an even smaller Rebel just for the sake of it, it doesn't change the game in terms of pocketability or quality. If they sell these, it's to not particularly perceptive individuals, who deserve to be separated from their money.

One hopes the premium Canon collects will go into the improvements the knowledgable all want.

Woody

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 517
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #124 on: July 23, 2012, 02:29:23 AM »
It's more expensive to get one of these (with the 22mm pancake and the EF adapter...$1000) than the superior Rebel T4i (with its kit) at $930 if you want EF lens support.

What does this buy you over the Rebel, sizewise? Nothing. The Rebel has an articulated screen, a viewfinder for sunny days, 9 cross-type AF points, better balance weight and grip for bigger EF lenses, no need for a lens mount adpater, and not much harder to place in a camera bag (as the EOS M will need since it does not fit into a pocket).

I think this is Canon simply responding to trends, some not very bright people want an even smaller Rebel just for the sake of it, it doesn't change the game in terms of pocketability or quality. If they sell these, it's to not particularly perceptive individuals, who deserve to be separated from their money.

One hopes the premium Canon collects will go into the improvements the knowledgable all want.

Interesting viewpoint. I like it. :)

caruser

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #125 on: July 23, 2012, 02:30:13 AM »
Anybody going to get one to try out?  It's fairly cheap, $799.

You forgot the $199 for the EF adapter that most people on this forum would probably want to include!

ssrdd

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #126 on: July 23, 2012, 03:10:20 AM »
same tech specs since 2009.
another canon flop show.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #126 on: July 23, 2012, 03:10:20 AM »

mb66energy

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
  • too many boring photos with high tech quality ...
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #127 on: July 23, 2012, 03:16:52 AM »
It's more expensive to get one of these (with the 22mm pancake and the EF adapter...$1000) than the superior Rebel T4i (with its kit) at $930 if you want EF lens support.

What does this buy you over the Rebel, sizewise? Nothing. The Rebel has an articulated screen, a viewfinder for sunny days, 9 cross-type AF points, better balance weight and grip for bigger EF lenses, no need for a lens mount adpater, and not much harder to place in a camera bag (as the EOS M will need since it does not fit into a pocket).[...]

Good point - I wanted to have a compact mirrorless which is compatible with my EF(-S) lenses including the shorty 40. The most important dimension to stow away a camera is camera THICKNESS - so the 22mm lens is essential. The most important reason to buy a mirrorless is to have a 2nd or 3rd camera attached to my EF(-S) lenses. So I have to buy the bulky adaptor with tripod mount. That's the 1000$/EUR - a T4i costs 750-800EUR in germany and is available.

Thickness of the EOS M + Adaptor  + shorty forty: roughly 80mm
Thickness of the 650D (or EOS40D) + shorty forty: roughly 85mm

After viewing a video about the use of the EOS M via the touch screen:
Direct controls are really really more ergonomic than fumbling with
symbols on a screen which should also act as viewfinder.

Conclusion:
 - EOS M is not substantially flatter with EF lenses than a 650D (or 40D, or 5Dxyz)
 - direct controls are preferred
 - built in flash in 650D is a welcome feature if it is used as all-day-with-me camera
 - flexible screen is welcome for video - the main reason for me to ad a new camera to my
   two 40Ds

Hopefully the next mirrorless has an EF mount and a cube shaped design like the rolleiflex
cameras with two displays (on top and on the back) which can be swapped to act
as finder and control panel ... that would be a clean solution and make it compact enough
to stow it in a lens bag :) ... the camera shurely with FF sensor  ;)

« Last Edit: July 23, 2012, 03:18:30 AM by mb66energy »
TOOLS: EF-S 10-22 | 60 || EF 2.8/24 | 2.8/40 | 2.8+2.0/100 | 4.0/70-200 | 5.6/400 || 2 x 40D || 2x TC ||| 600D for video ||| EOS M + bunch of FD chrome rings

mb66energy

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
  • too many boring photos with high tech quality ...
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #128 on: July 23, 2012, 03:21:55 AM »
same tech specs since 2009.
another canon flop show.

Not exactly - the dimensions of a camera are part of the tech specs. And in terms
of compactness (if used with the 22mm lens) and the sensor size it is an advance
for those who just want to use that package. I think there is some progress
and if it's a flop - the buyers will decide.

As stated in my post above I am more interested in the 650D to acquire the
option of video with EF(-S) lenses - this camera (the EOS M) isn't the right upgrade
for ME because it is to limited and for that it's to expensive.
TOOLS: EF-S 10-22 | 60 || EF 2.8/24 | 2.8/40 | 2.8+2.0/100 | 4.0/70-200 | 5.6/400 || 2 x 40D || 2x TC ||| 600D for video ||| EOS M + bunch of FD chrome rings

rafaelsynths

  • Guest
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #129 on: July 23, 2012, 03:57:13 AM »
Anybody going to get one to try out?  It's fairly cheap, $799.

Ordered!

I have a Canon T4i.  This is a perfect second camera, especially for video.

I am in the process of paring my 14+ Canon lenses down to 5 or 6. 

I am going to go with the 22 2.0, 40 2.8, and 85 1.8 for primes.  (From: 24 2.8, 45 TS-E, 50 1.8, 85 1.2, 90 TS-E, Contax 28 mm)

For zooms, I am going with the 18-135 STM for video, along with the 24-70 2.8 II (for absolute highest quality on zoom, I use that lens 80% of teh time), and the 70-200 4.0  (sold the 70-200 2.8 II because it is so heavy.)

I am very happy with the T4i. It has basically the same image that my $8,000 Canon 1DsII had in 2004.

Yes, the Exmor has a bit more DR at lower ISO's.  But if you are posting in sRGB mode you are never going to see it. Even with prints you are compressing the DR beyond what the Canon captures, much less the Sony.

I am perfectly happy with the Canon sensors.  I have been a pro photog for 30+ years, retired now so downsizing to prosumer level.

Great tools we have today! Now we just need a few video firmware tweaks this fall, either from Canon, or Magic Lantern.

Have fun!
Michael

I really don't understand why anyone in the right mind would pay $800 for a crappy camera like this or why on earth you would even buy the T4i.  Very Pro of you. *sarcasm*

funkboy

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 415
  • 6D & a bunch of crazy primes
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #130 on: July 23, 2012, 04:37:57 AM »
A few things occurred to me when musing about the lack of built-in flash.



A built-in flash would have a pretty bad lens shadowing problem with just about anything except the 22mm pancake.  It just can't get high enough like a built-in on a DSLR body can (Panasonic has been pretty good at solving this problem though).  Even in a reasonably-sized adapted setup like this one:



the lens shadow would be pretty big.

Also, a large part of the reason for this camera's existence is video, which doesn't need built-in flash (& probably doesn't justify some kind of built-in video light in this class of camera).

I think it's an interesting prospect for existing EOS users as a tiny second body that shoots good video.

caruser

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #131 on: July 23, 2012, 04:45:16 AM »
Good point about the flash!

I think it's an interesting prospect for existing EOS users as a tiny second body that shoots good video.

The price is a bit high though, in particular the 200 for a mechanical adapter. With such a camera I would also like to get an FD adapter and go raiding local camera shops for cheap lenses ;-)

funkboy

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 415
  • 6D & a bunch of crazy primes
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #132 on: July 23, 2012, 05:02:31 AM »
With such a camera I would also like to get an FD adapter and go raiding local camera shops for cheap lenses ;-)

Absolutely.  I certainly won't get one of these cameras until I can natively mount all my Contax glass on it.  Focus peaking would help; hopefully Canon will read the reviews & add it in future firmware...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #132 on: July 23, 2012, 05:02:31 AM »

marekjoz

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
    • marekjoz @flickr
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #133 on: July 23, 2012, 05:05:15 AM »
A few things occurred to me when musing about the lack of built-in flash.

A built-in flash would have a pretty bad lens shadowing problem with just about anything except the 22mm pancake.  It just can't get high enough like a built-in on a DSLR body can (Panasonic has been pretty good at solving this problem though).  Even in a reasonably-sized adapted setup like this one:

the lens shadow would be pretty big.

Also, a large part of the reason for this camera's existence is video, which doesn't need built-in flash (& probably doesn't justify some kind of built-in video light in this class of camera).

I think it's an interesting prospect for existing EOS users as a tiny second body that shoots good video.

It could be such a popup like this and lens would not cast such a shadow (sorry for quality - 5mins in gimp)

THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE HOW IT COULD BE. DON'T THINK THERE IS SUCH A VERSION OF EOS-M!
« Last Edit: July 23, 2012, 05:08:12 AM by marekjoz »
flickr | youtube | 5D2, 50 F/1.4, 24-105 F/4 L IS, 300 F/4 L IS, x1.4 II

Woody

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 517
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #134 on: July 23, 2012, 05:41:07 AM »

Thickness of the EOS M + Adaptor  + shorty forty: roughly 80mm
Thickness of the 650D (or EOS40D) + shorty forty: roughly 85mm

Thanks for that info. I looked into the weight difference:

Weight of 650D + battery = 575 g
Weight of EOS M + battery + card + adapter = 348 g

Approximately 200 g savings in weight with the EOS M + adapter.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS M Specs
« Reply #134 on: July 23, 2012, 05:41:07 AM »