*UPDATED* Is This The Canon EOS M5?

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,620
1,651
sigh said:
ahsanford said:
lw said:
Apparently, these are the kits - http://nokiS___a-camera.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/eos-m5.html

EOS M5 body
EOS M5 15-45mm kit
EOS M5 18-150mm kit

Hey, CR guy, why is Nokish ita getting the Canon Watch treatment? I thought they were reputable...

- A

I suspect those four letters may have been caught by the profanity filter.

S___. Good call. Even in a URL, wow.

- A
 
Upvote 0
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
Haydn1971 said:
AvTvM said:
More is not needed.

In your opinion of course ;-)

I and many others want more...

well, usually I am accused of being delusional ... but chances that Canon ever will make fast primes (like f/1.4 or 1.2) and/or wheathersealed "L" grade lenses for EF-Mount = a crop sensor system are really zero.

Good news is, that some of the dirt-cheap EF-M lenses have absolutely "L"-ish image quality. 22/2.0, 11-22 definitely.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,095
12,857
Maximilian said:
LDS said:
Tugela said:
Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.

No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. ...
And in addition on-chip A/D conversion (if implemented as of new sensor tech) will increase the number of semiconductors on the chip leading to even more heat losses.
Of course it can be assumed that most of he heat losses come from the processor but while this one might cope a lot of heat already little increase of sensor temperature could cause negative effects on the readout quality, e.g. additional read noise.

So I am quite inclined to follow pokerz initial argumentation, that others have problems with 4K while Canon decided to not implement it in consumer products as long as it is not working properly, because here it is required to work without any trouble.

In the past, Tugela has not shown himself to be particularly knowlegdable from a technical standpoint (despite attempts to sound technically erudite). For example, his prior statement that any Canon camera with Digic 7 would have 4K video capture...but then the PowerShot G7 X Mark II came out with Digic 7 and no 4K.

As for the sensor itself generating heat during video capture, well, there's a reason my scientific cameras have Peltier cooling on the back side of the sensor, and it's not because of heat from the processor.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
LDS said:
Tugela said:
Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.

No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. Then there are other elements in a camera that can generate heat. Of course if you have to read and process data continuously, all them will generate heat which needs to be dissipated.

as the sensor fab geometry decreases, the sensor heat will also increase.
 
Upvote 0

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
Nov 11, 2012
4,719
1,537
Yorkshire, England
A-PeeR said:
ashmadux said:
I tested the hell out of them(3), against my trusty M1+Phottix all metal grip.

I put them directly against in other in a host of ultra-normal, non stressful shooting situation with the same lens. The M1 handles all of the same situations like cake. The M3 failed every single comparison. Getting ANY sharp images from the M3 just wasn't happening. Sadder is that even on a tripod, images where 'sharp-ish' at best.

It drove me apeshat bonkers.

Then after an incredibly difficult, HUGE amount of research, I found out that the image problems came from a combo of things:
I
-body isnt heavy enough
-hard shutter slap induces movement
-24mp sensor is much more sensitive to ANY movement, so much higher shutter speeds are needed to get sharp images.


I was under the impression that the M3 (all Canon cameras with live view for that matter) has EFCS. If that's the case, is shutter shock the culprit?

Yes, your impression is correct. It does have EFCS, but when you fire the shutter at say half a second, so there is an obvious open and close, there is a distinct sound and small shock as the camera fires. This cannot be felt with the 5D in live view, but then that camera has so much mass it may be I just can't feel it.

Strange, can anyone explain ?
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,095
12,857
neuroanatomist said:
Maximilian said:
LDS said:
Tugela said:
Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.

No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. ...
And in addition on-chip A/D conversion (if implemented as of new sensor tech) will increase the number of semiconductors on the chip leading to even more heat losses.
Of course it can be assumed that most of he heat losses come from the processor but while this one might cope a lot of heat already little increase of sensor temperature could cause negative effects on the readout quality, e.g. additional read noise.

So I am quite inclined to follow pokerz initial argumentation, that others have problems with 4K while Canon decided to not implement it in consumer products as long as it is not working properly, because here it is required to work without any trouble.

In the past, Tugela has not shown himself to be particularly knowlegdable from a technical standpoint (despite attempts to sound technically erudite). For example, his prior statement that any Canon camera with Digic 7 would have 4K video capture...but then the PowerShot G7 X Mark II came out with Digic 7 and no 4K.

As for the sensor itself generating heat during video capture, well, there's a reason my scientific cameras have Peltier cooling on the back side of the sensor, and it's not because of heat from the processor.

Seems we can add the EOS M5 to the list of cameras with Digic 7. Tugela, does the EOS M5 shoot 4K video?
 
Upvote 0
neuroanatomist said:
neuroanatomist said:
Maximilian said:
LDS said:
Tugela said:
Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.

No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. ...

Forever 1080 60P, thats CANON
And in addition on-chip A/D conversion (if implemented as of new sensor tech) will increase the number of semiconductors on the chip leading to even more heat losses.
Of course it can be assumed that most of he heat losses come from the processor but while this one might cope a lot of heat already little increase of sensor temperature could cause negative effects on the readout quality, e.g. additional read noise.

So I am quite inclined to follow pokerz initial argumentation, that others have problems with 4K while Canon decided to not implement it in consumer products as long as it is not working properly, because here it is required to work without any trouble.

In the past, Tugela has not shown himself to be particularly knowlegdable from a technical standpoint (despite attempts to sound technically erudite). For example, his prior statement that any Canon camera with Digic 7 would have 4K video capture...but then the PowerShot G7 X Mark II came out with Digic 7 and no 4K.

As for the sensor itself generating heat during video capture, well, there's a reason my scientific cameras have Peltier cooling on the back side of the sensor, and it's not because of heat from the processor.

Seems we can add the EOS M5 to the list of cameras with Digic 7. Tugela, does the EOS M5 shoot 4K video?


Forever 1080 60P, thats CANON
 
Upvote 0
May 15, 2014
918
0
AvTvM said:
No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D

Years ago in college I had a roommate who had a habit of just talking out of his *ss. This statement completely falls into that category.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
Luds34 said:
AvTvM said:
No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D

Years ago in college I had a roommate who had a habit of just talking out of his *ss. This statement completely falls into that category.

Not really. the 11-22 and 22 2.0 can be purchased new for under $500 combined. they are both excellent optically , and small.

the corresponding Fuji lenses are optically on par or slightly better, and far larger, heavier and far far more expensive.
 
Upvote 0
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
the corresponding Fuji lenses are only mechanically better. and of course the 10-24 is constant f/4 and 1mm wider, which is a clear advantage over the EF-M 11-22. IQ wise, those little canon EF-M lenses are real beasts.

Canon could however take a cue from the neato and cheapo Fuji 35/2.0 - optically and pricewise it would be EF-M-worthy! of course i'd prefer it even lighter, plastic not metal and without the useless aperture ring.
 
Upvote 0
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
AvTvM said:
the cortrsponding fuji lenses are only mechanically better. and of course the 10-24 is constant f/4 and 1mm wider, which is a clear advantage over the EF-M 11-22. but iq wise, those little canon EF-M lenses are real beasts.

canon could however take a cue from the neato and cheapo fuji 35/2.0 - optically and pricewise it would be EF-M-worthy! of course i'd prefer it even lighter, plastic not metal and without the useless aperture ring.

a 15/3.5 and a 35/1.8 would certainly be nice additions.

same with giving Sigma a little payola to release EF-M DN Art lenses
 
Upvote 0
May 15, 2014
918
0
rrcphoto said:
Luds34 said:
AvTvM said:
No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D

Years ago in college I had a roommate who had a habit of just talking out of his *ss. This statement completely falls into that category.

Not really. the 11-22 and 22 2.0 can be purchased new for under $500 combined. they are both excellent optically , and small.

the corresponding Fuji lenses are optically on par or slightly better, and far larger, heavier and far far more expensive.

Gentlemen,

I was referring to the "no Fuji X-lens can optically touch..." statement. That is just plain false. A majority of the Fuji XF lenses are optically outstanding! They are well known for excellent micro contrast.

While the Fuji system is really starting to come into it's own as a complete, well rounded system, that wasn't always the case. Focus was slooooow on static objects, forget about motion. There were other quirks with most bodies. However, the one thing they had going from day one, has been the IQ in the images. And a large part of that has been their optically top-notch glass.

Cheers!
 
Upvote 0

Haydn1971

UK based, hobbyist
Nov 7, 2010
593
1
52
Sheffield, UK
www.flickr.com
rrcphoto said:
a 15/3.5 and a 35/1.8 would certainly be nice additions.

Both as small pancake type lenses, sounds good to me, then something longer, fast and compact.

I'd say the previously suggested 30mm would be way too close to the 28mm macro...

So 15 - 22 - 28 - 35 - 50-56mm
 
Upvote 0
AvTvM said:
the corresponding Fuji lenses are only mechanically better. and of course the 10-24 is constant f/4 and 1mm wider, which is a clear advantage over the EF-M 11-22. IQ wise, those little canon EF-M lenses are real beasts.

Canon could however take a cue from the neato and cheapo Fuji 35/2.0 - optically and pricewise it would be EF-M-worthy! of course i'd prefer it even lighter, plastic not metal and without the useless aperture ring.
Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?
 
Upvote 0
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
pokerz said:
Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?

because any reasonable digital camera has one or more very decent physical controls to vary aperture size. those control elements are called back wherl and front wheel and/or touch LCD plus proper firmware. control can be clicked in full, half or 1/3 stops or smooth action ... as user prefers and sets it.
 
Upvote 0
AvTvM said:
pokerz said:
Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?

because any reasonable digital camera has one or more very decent physical controls to vary aperture size. those control elements are called back wherl and front wheel and/or touch LCD plus proper firmware. control can be clicked in full, half or 1/3 stops or smooth action ... as user prefers and sets it.
Which Canon DSLR/ Mirrorless has said function? ;D
 
Upvote 0
Luds34 said:
rrcphoto said:
Luds34 said:
AvTvM said:
No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D

Years ago in college I had a roommate who had a habit of just talking out of his *ss. This statement completely falls into that category.

Not really. the 11-22 and 22 2.0 can be purchased new for under $500 combined. they are both excellent optically , and small.

the corresponding Fuji lenses are optically on par or slightly better, and far larger, heavier and far far more expensive.

Gentlemen,

I was referring to the "no Fuji X-lens can optically touch..." statement. That is just plain false. A majority of the Fuji XF lenses are optically outstanding! They are well known for excellent micro contrast.

While the Fuji system is really starting to come into it's own as a complete, well rounded system, that wasn't always the case. Focus was slooooow on static objects, forget about motion. There were other quirks with most bodies. However, the one thing they had going from day one, has been the IQ in the images. And a large part of that has been their optically top-notch glass.

Cheers!

+1 and I do have Fuji lenses, as well as the canon 11-22 and 22 f2 to compare.

If the size of the M5 is right it will be higher than the Fuji X-T10. Shame, was hoping for a form factor similar to the A6300.

On another note, has there been any more news on the canon tilt and shift adapter that was patented some time ago? That would make for a really interesting enthusiasts addition.
 
Upvote 0
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
pokerz said:
AvTvM said:
pokerz said:
Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?

because any reasonable digital camera has one or more very decent physical controls to vary aperture size. those control elements are called back wherl and front wheel and/or touch LCD plus proper firmware. control can be clicked in full, half or 1/3 stops or smooth action ... as user prefers and sets it.
Which Canon DSLR/ Mirrorless has said function? ;D

every single EOS M ever made from M 1st gen to M2, M10 and M3. all have at least 1 wheel and a touch LCD to control aperture in Av and M. video? dont care, go buy a video camera.
 
Upvote 0