Canon EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS - stupid Canon, go make it!

[neuroanatomist]

stats: you just don't count. there you go!

 

[brad-man]

stats: you just don't count. there you go!

This is a rather insensitive post. You know how he hates mirrors...

 

[ahsanford]

I think he meant look in the mirror; it also doubles as a further insult though, clever.

What is it between those two anyways? For as long as I've been on the board it's a urinary sword fight between them... Seems like Neuro is a 1DX lover, and AvTVM is a A6300/A7RII lover, or something like that. Actually come to think of it, I don't think AvTVM is a Sony lover, that's other folks on the board.

I think it's great we have different needs and desires for our future Canon widget, I'm just curious if someone started it one day or something like that is my train of thought.

It's not mean-spirited or anything. AvTvM believes the future photography world is obvious and what he/she wants should be the next thing Canon should offer, and Neuro is correctly pointing out how baseless his/her positions are.

Overwhelmingly I agree with Neuro, but I do appreciate AvTvM's passion/mania for what he/she wants.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Actually I'd agree with AvTVM, not to disagree, but rather, I do feel mirrorless will, eventually, replace traditional mirrors *gasp*, but it may take some time. I don't expect the EF lineup to die by the way, most of us are heavily invested in that format. But, you may see Canon's FF mirrorless implementation be out of the box, perhaps it comes with an updated EF to EF-M adapter would be my guess.

Between advancement of the global shutter, EVF's, and chip tech both on the sensor and DIGIC processor, it's a matter of when, not if, my opinion.

Will a chip ever match a mirror? No.
Will it come so close in the future as to be indistinguishable? Yes.

One man's opinion.

You are not remotely in the minority with that position. Mirrorless is the future. What we tend to argue about is when that future will arrive, but I happen to think it will be awhile. It might take 20 years, but by that time the only thing sticking with a mirror will be the highest-end field tools. Everything else will be mirrorless at that point.

The attitude that winds me up personally is "if you know mirrorless is inevitable, that should be the only thing Canon is working on!" which implies mirrorless photography is an enormous land that must be conquered quickly for the sake of doing so or other people will do it first. It's a market, it's not a race to the moon.

- A

 

[slclick]

Actually I'd agree with AvTVM, not to disagree, but rather, I do feel mirrorless will, eventually, replace traditional mirrors *gasp*, but it may take some time. I don't expect the EF lineup to die by the way, most of us are heavily invested in that format. But, you may see Canon's FF mirrorless implementation be out of the box, perhaps it comes with an updated EF to EF-M adapter would be my guess.

Between advancement of the global shutter, EVF's, and chip tech both on the sensor and DIGIC processor, it's a matter of when, not if, my opinion.

Will a chip ever match a mirror? No.
Will it come so close in the future as to be indistinguishable? Yes.

One man's opinion.

You are not remotely in the minority with that position. Mirrorless is the future. What we tend to argue about is when that future will arrive, but I happen to think it will be awhile. It might take 20 years, but by that time the only thing sticking with a mirror will be the highest-end field tools. Everything else will be mirrorless at that point.

The attitude that winds me up personally is "if you know mirrorless is inevitable, that should be the only thing Canon is working on!" which implies mirrorless photography is an enormous land that must be conquered quickly for the sake of doing so or other people will do it first. It's a market, it's not a race to the moon.

- A

I'm in total agreement with what you typed but remember, attention spans are at an all time low and everyone wants things yesterday... Re: the thread about announcements vs releases.

 

[Frodo]

I agree with TheTech. Having started photography with a Canonet QL19 film camera 45 years ago, and worked my way through an F1, eventually to the EOS series and then Canon's digitals, there has been a lot of change. But its the rate of change at the moment that is amazing. I sold my 7D for an EOS M3 to shed weight on a long hike I have planned shortly. I've been pleasantly surprised about the quality of the images (I'll post the results of a comparison with the 6D shortly) and even with things like the touchscreen (great for shifting the AF point).
This has made it quite clear to me that the future for prosumer cameras is definitely mirrorless. Yes, even with an M3!

But back to the thread. Yes, I would like some primes. I would prefer reasonably fast primes, because that can be done within the objective of keeping the lenses small. For example, I'm looking at Samyang 12mm f/2 and it would be great to have something similar from Canon. And 50mm f/2 would also be great. I'd settle for f/2.4 for an 85mm.
I will shortly buy an EF-M adapter to use my existing lenses, but the combo is quite bulky and I hear the focus is slower.

 

[Sporgon]

I've got the full M3 system as well as FF dslr. I'm really not sure that the future is totally mirrorless. Yes they have some advantages, theoretically many advantages, and I like others on this forum am finding the focus peaking and manual focus is great to use, as is being able to review the image in the viewfinder, but EVFs are going to have to come a long way further if they are to replace a good reflex OVF, both in terms of view and power consumption.

The fact is the view through a good OVF is both power free and real / realtime.

I know a guy who has recently moved to the A7rII. After a few months of use his only complaint ? The EVF.

Back on topic, the M3 works really well with the adapter. It's not "clunky" (to use a Neuro term) and if you use the smaller EF primes, still a neat package. So stick on an EF 50/1.4 or an EF 85/1.8 ( or a Takumar 55/1.8 - yummy) and you're good to go.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It's both a market, and, a race to the moon.

Speaking of how long, I'd estimate 4 years for mirror-less to be a 5D, 6D and 7D "replacement". That may seem fast, but it's not. Technological change is speeding up, as is the competition. That's the market.

If you look back, it's taken the EOS M 4 years to get here, and at the same time, look where Sony has gotten in that same time period with their A system, and Nikon with the 1 system, with probably less funding.

I think that's unlikely. Look where the EOS M is after 4 years – slow sales outside of Asia, and the line moving 'downmarket' (PowerShot firmware, etc). Look at the drivers for Sony over that time period – repeated attempts to compete with CaNikon and erode dSLR market share, but while dSLR market share has contracted, overall MILC sales haven't increased, and Sony just lost top MILC spot to Olympus in the largest MILC market (where Canon is 3rd without really trying).

The only way I see MILCs actually taking over any time soon is if Canon and Nikon simply drop the mirror, i.e. xxxD and Dxxxx bodies in something very much like their current form factor (no adapter for current lenses), only lacking a mirror.

 

[3kramd5]

I know a guy who has recently moved to the A7rII. After a few months of use his only complaint ? The EVF.

Wow!

I find the EVF to be fairly workable. AF point selection is my biggest irk.

 

[Sporgon]

I know a guy who has recently moved to the A7rII. After a few months of use his only complaint ? The EVF.

Wow!

I find the EVF to be fairly workable. AF point selection is my biggest irk.

Principley low light work I think

 

[Mikehit]

It's both a market, and, a race to the moon.

Speaking of how long, I'd estimate 4 years for mirror-less to be a 5D, 6D and 7D "replacement".

It depends on what you mean by a 'replacement' - mirrorless is already there on image quality. There were a few reviews showing the synamic range and shadow recovery of the Oly EM-5 was easily the equal of the Canon 5DII. And even now there are studio pros moving from DSLR to MFT.

The real challenge came with cameras like the Canon 100D that had APS-C sensors in a body not much larger than MFT bodies (especially when compared to things like the Panny GH3).
Mirrorless cameras are even good enough on focus tracking for most people .

But mirrorless challenge continues to be not the image quality but the public perception where 'real' cameras are DSLR - and I am pretty sure even a top notch mirrorless from Canon will have the same problem and it is impossible to predict how long that public inertia will take to overcome.

 

[ahsanford]

But mirrorless challenge continues to be not the image quality but the public perception where 'real' cameras are DSLR - and I am pretty sure even a top notch mirrorless from Canon will have the same problem and it is impossible to predict how long that public inertia will take to overcome.

Respectfully disagree with you there.

Strong sensor IQ and 'good enough' tracking AF are far from the only barometers to assess when Mirrorless will be ready. On a host of fronts -- responsiveness, AF speed, battery life, availability of native lenses, etc. -- moving to mirrorless from an SLR still punishes you more than it rewards you.

I think mirrorless is an excellent call for a 2nd rig when you are shooting informally, on vacation, etc. and need a smaller form factor rig. I just can't rely on it as a primary rig at this stage given how much I'd be giving up.

- A

 

[Ozarker]

i do not want 50ish. Too short for what I need. I want 85mm on crop 1,6x ... in a "pancakish" lens.
Manual focus is 100% no go for me. Have not used it ever since 1987 when i got my first Minolta AF SLR.

Stupid Canon, stupid. At 399 they would sell gazillion copies of that lens.

"ish" I had always wondered if you might be SWF "ish" with 30 cats and a bunch of broken mirrors.

 

[Mikehit]

But mirrorless challenge continues to be not the image quality but the public perception where 'real' cameras are DSLR - and I am pretty sure even a top notch mirrorless from Canon will have the same problem and it is impossible to predict how long that public inertia will take to overcome.

Respectfully disagree with you there.

Strong sensor IQ and 'good enough' tracking AF are far from the only barometers to assess when Mirrorless will be ready. On a host of fronts -- responsiveness, AF speed, battery life, availability of native lenses, etc. -- moving to mirrorless from an SLR still punishes you more than it rewards you.

I think mirrorless is an excellent call for a 2nd rig when you are shooting informally, on vacation, etc. and need a smaller form factor rig. I just can't rely on it as a primary rig at this stage given how much I'd be giving up.

- A

I'm on board with you there, ahsanford, but I am also mindful of the fact that I do not form part of the vast majority of the camera-buying public: responsiveness does ot matter to them and availability of native lenses is irrelevant to a market sector that very rarely buys a new lens once they walk out of the shop with their new purchase.

By the way, for the initial shot, AF speed on my Olympus EM-5 and my Panasonic GX7 are easily the match of what my 7D2 can do. Continuous focus is a different matter as has been discussed elsewhere but even then if we look at the market for xxxD [Rebel] models, MFTs are probably as good in most circumstances for typical images (kids running round the park etc).

 

[3kramd5]

I know a guy who has recently moved to the A7rII. After a few months of use his only complaint ? The EVF.

Wow!

I find the EVF to be fairly workable. AF point selection is my biggest irk.

Principley low light work I think

Gotcha. Next time you see him, suggest in low light (or when using strobes, etc) he set Setting Effect to Off. While not OVF, it's much better than when it's trying to display in real time something significantly amplified from what it's seeing.

 

[Sporgon]

I know a guy who has recently moved to the A7rII. After a few months of use his only complaint ? The EVF.

Wow!

I find the EVF to be fairly workable. AF point selection is my biggest irk.

Principley low light work I think

Gotcha. Next time you see him, suggest in low light (or when using strobes, etc) he set Setting Effect to Off. While not OVF, it's much better than when it's trying to display in real time something significantly amplified from what it's seeing.

Thanks for that info. I'll pass it on.