More Canon EOS M5 Images & Specifications

[H. Jones]

I'm honestly a bit impressed by all this. I'll have to check it out in the stores when it releases and if the price isn't too bad I might have to pick it up with the 15-45mm and 22mm. Daytime wouldn't be bad with the 15-45mm, especially if you follow "f/8 and be there," and the 22mm seems like an excellent option for getting images at night.

Not a bad size at all to have a 24-70mm and 35mm f/2 on me anywhere I go. With wi-fi and NFC, it would also be easy to transmit any photos of breaking news if I wind up somewhere without my 1dx2 and 5D3. I currently keep a 5D3 with my 24-70mm f/2.8 II and cellphone cables in a small bag in my backpack/on my shoulder wherever I go, so this would be a huge decrease in size compared to that, even with two lenses.

Part of me wants to hold out for a full-frame mirrorless camera, but I'm not sure yet since that would also mean size increases. I guess I'll wait and see if they've kept the powershot firmware or if the camera will be used more like a DSLR.

 

[Roy2001]

4K is overrated for the time being.


Here's why - like you've said, most people don't have 4K TV's and here in the USA, I would guesstimate that 1/3 or more of new TV sales are still 1080. When I walk the stores, there are still many 1080 selections and they still have to mark the 4K TV's with a sign saying they are 4K.

Now, when will everyone get 4K? I think sooner than later. This isn't because of a need, but because the reliability of these electronics is pitiful these days. Very cheap and poor components goes into these, and people are having to replace 3-5 year cycle. That and at least in the US, there's that desire to have the latest and greatest even though it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter because there's almost no 4K content available yet. In fact, when it comes to cable packages - they aren't close to getting full 1080 content, heck, there's a lot of stuff that isn't even 720.

So, let us assume for a moment that finally - all TV channels are 1080 finally once and for all. Are they really 1080? They are in RESOLUTION, but not in QUALITY. There's a lot of compression and processing going on - and none of the on-air or cable stuff is true 1080 high def quality as you would get with say a Bluray video or PC video mastered at top quality.

That said....

Watching a 1080 video at it's absolute best potential is pretty amazing, many years after this became the "standard" ...and I believe more than satisfies the vast majority of end users.

Thus, people are really limited to professionally shot and produced content delivered to their TV via Blueray or PC to be able to take any advantage. A 4K GoPro does not count. These lower level video recording devices, including most DSLR and mirrorless are not capturing the quality necessary to take full advantage. They are recording to that resolution, but not to the quality level that resolution is capable of.


That explains my hostility toward all this 4K stuff in these forums. It's pointless to some extent. Unless you buy high end professional video gear, use the best lenses, use professional technique and support equipment - the end result will look like ass. Sorry for the crude expression, but 8K wouldn't help one bit if not shot to the capability of the format.

Why are people paying top dollar for access to something that doesn't exist?

The TV's in the stores look amazing, because they are looping a promotional video shot in 4K with the best possible production. Then consumers take the TV home to watch highly compressed 1080 cable or netflix, and an occasional Bluray.

By the time enough real 4K comes around, the TV's will have dropped in price - or there will be much newer models with superior LED technology.


In short, to maximize 4K capability requires professional production. Whether people like to hear it or not - that's the facts. It's the same situation with high resolution DSLR. The 5DSR, to really take advantage of it for stills requires proper technique. Running and gunning with it diminishes its max potential quite a bit. Same with medium format. For video, the quality is so high now - that for the first time a threshold has been reached where higher production standards are necessary to take advantage. It's not like the VHS days where perfect technique could be overlooked because the format just couldn't capture the quality and detail.


This is why 4K isn't a big deal in DSLR or Mirrorless cameras. Canon, being a PRACTICAL company - knows this. But marketing hype and consumer craze and drive is not practical thinking. It just wants numbers.

Want great 4K? Canon offers it in the proper place - within their professional line ups, where you could actually make use of it to deliver.

Thank you for typing so many BS, when we are in a world that most decent smart phones in store can record 4K video. And I remember when we were looking for 1080p recording, people like you talk about miniDV format is good enough. I can't stop laughing.

 

[crashpc]

No, he's not. Truly usable camera and PC rig is like $2000+ for weaker setups. How many people have this as ordinary consumer stuff for video making and consumption? We're talking fractions of %.

 

[josephandrews222]

Wow. There's nothing I don't like about that spec list, nor about those pictures. This looks like exactly the camera I wanted.

I see my poor EF-M 11-22mm, left without an M body for 6 months, jump up on my shelf with excitement. It was after all my 2nd most used lens overall (EF and EF-M combined) before I broke my M3 ...

In any case, I'm waiting to see the price, but anything south of a grand and I'm pre-ordering right away. Exciting

How did your M3 break?

 

[Etienne]

I'm honestly a bit impressed by all this. I'll have to check it out in the stores when it releases and if the price isn't too bad I might have to pick it up with the 15-45mm and 22mm. Daytime wouldn't be bad with the 15-45mm, especially if you follow "f/8 and be there," and the 22mm seems like an excellent option for getting images at night.

Not a bad size at all to have a 24-70mm and 35mm f/2 on me anywhere I go. With wi-fi and NFC, it would also be easy to transmit any photos of breaking news if I wind up somewhere without my 1dx2 and 5D3. I currently keep a 5D3 with my 24-70mm f/2.8 II and cellphone cables in a small bag in my backpack/on my shoulder wherever I go, so this would be a huge decrease in size compared to that, even with two lenses.

Part of me wants to hold out for a full-frame mirrorless camera, but I'm not sure yet since that would also mean size increases. I guess I'll wait and see if they've kept the powershot firmware or if the camera will be used more like a DSLR.

I use the M3 with 11-22 , and I carry the 22mm f/2 for low light.
I am biased toward wide angle, so this works great for me, although I'd love to see an EF-M 50mm f/1.8 IS with nano-USM!

The EOS-M5 is very likely to be my next buy.

 

[rrcphoto]

Thank you for typing so many BS, when we are in a world that most decent smart phones in store can record 4K video. And I remember when we were looking for 1080p recording, people like you talk about miniDV format is good enough. I can't stop laughing.

you DO realize the difference in size of sensors there .. right?

 

[scyrene]

This has to be the most positive response to a new Canon camera I've seen in all my time here. Bodes well! It's of no interest to me personally, but I'm glad lots of people are finding it appealing.

 

[scyrene]

Errr....most people don't spend over £100 a month on sky, so for the majority it will be an expensive luxury. the vast majority of consumers aren't interested in 4K, this isn't like the rush to HD, which was more about moving from CRT TVs to flat screen.

My £100+ includes telephone and broadband, and multiroom.
The majority of people in the UK have Sky. The point is if they have Sports and Movies they can get them in 4K for no extra charge.

Most people in the UK would think spending £800 on a camera is a far greater luxury than subscribing to Sky...

Um, actually no they don't. This article is a year old, but the numbers won't have changed nearly enough to make your statement correct: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/29/sky-profits-rise-customers-germany-italy

12 million customers, so <20% of the UK population.

 

[scyrene]

It looks like Canon finally stepped up the performance of their mirrorless camera...still needs prime lenses, etc...but that has to be the butt-ugliest camera I have seen in years. It looks like no design went into it at all...just function.
Camera but commitee?

I'm always a bit confused by statements of camera ugliness. Aside from being subjective of course, most cameras look similar to me... can you give examples of cameras you think are visually attractive, please?

 

[ahsanford]

Who wants to do pro-level 4K videography on a small mirrorless camera anyway? Are these concerns even serious, or is this trolling? I don't get it.

It is not only what people want, they are expecting 4K. Look at all the other small mirrorless cameras released this year from Sony, Fujifilm, and Panasonic. Just look at the bestsellers at BH in mirrorless.

It's more than just 4K. The 5D4 got 4K but then the backlash on crop, codecs, etc. immediately followed. Until folks are making JJ Abrams quality wedding movies on product not expressly designed for that purpose, people throw tantrums and threaten to head elsewhere.

Above and beyond video, I see it as a somewhat toxic 'improvement entitlement of the consumer' that some tech-focused folks demonstrate. It's similar to those who say "Sure, I'll pick up the new SLR that just came out provided it's 2-3 stops better at high ISO levels than the last one" or offer the peach of "My GoPro can do that and my SLR can't!" These are unreasonable asks of products that simply do not evolve this quickly.

And for those that say that such tech breakthroughs are just sitting across the street with another companies' product, YMMV. Video is not my wheelhouse at all, but I seem to recall other mirrorless rigs offering 4K have crop factor limitations, limited recording times, heating problems and (in the case of the GH4) need enormous bodies relative to their sensor size to do the job. So, congrats to naysayers, the grass appears greener elsewhere, but go and migrate to that platform and see if you find happiness. My guess is there will still be something missing.

I'm no Canon apologist, but not being bleeding edge on a few specs doesn't wind me up.

Except for only 7 fps in the 5D4 and no spot metering linked to an off-center AF point. ;D

- A

 

[JMZawodny]

I too will be very interested to see how this performs and what the pricing will be. It revived my interest in the 28mm EF-M Macro, the tilt display will certainly help in this application. I have the original M and this seems to be the same basic size for the main body with a bit of extra height for the EVF and thickness for the grip. I have other cameras that do 4k video, so I'm not really concerned about lack of it on the M5. I'm glad I did not give in and buy an SL1 with this prices being so low now. Can't wait.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

A few things:

1) Great spec list. On paper it looks great, so, for Canon, that probably means it will be pretty great. They tend to deliver on their spec lists.

2) For those concerned about battery - the M3 VASTLY outperforms its rating in real world use. I usually get 600-700 shots on a charge. My hope is that the bigger grips makes room for a slightly higher capacity battery, as both the IS and the DPAF might suck a little extra juice.

Agree regarding battery life of the M3 - I recently returned from a trip and was easily getting 400 - 500+ shots using a combination of EVF and LCD, with a fair bit of chimping.

3) Canon desperately needs to update/replace the existing EF adapter. It worked better on the M/M2 than it does on the M3.

As I have only used the M3 with the EF adaptor, in what respect do you find it's performance inferior to that with the M/M2?

Encouraged that this might build on the good things about the M3 while dealing with the many unfortunate quirks of that camera.

Likewise.

d.

More lenses work better on the M1/M2. More third party compatibility. More Canon lenses work normally. Pretty much everything.

 

[transpo1]

--> Proud 4K Post --> Re: More Canon EOS M5 Images & Specifications

How cool is that. A 2017 camera model with 1080p video. Go Canon! Because who needs more than 2 megapixels?

Errr... how many people have 4K TV at home?

Deja vu... Roll back just 10 years to when HD was introduced and the cry was "how many people have a HD TV at home?"

3 or 4 years later and you couldn't buy an SD TV anymore.

The same is happening again. Walk in to any TV retailer and its wall to wall 4K and they are no more expensive than good HD sets were last year.

3 or 4 years from now, 4K will be as ubiquitous as HD was. The same pattern will be followed.

Plenty of 4K content here in the UK including live sport like football and F1 www.sky.com/shop/tv/uhd/

Whilst you're not wrong regarding the availability of 4K TVs, I don't think that sales are in the same league as they were when we moved to HD, just because all TVs for sale now are 4K doesn't translate into everyone has a 4K TV. Also the price of subscribing to Sky in general puts 4K content in the luxury bracket. Canon has a good grasp on what the market actually wants and frankly my guess is that 4K video is low on the list right now.

4K is overrated for the time being.


Here's why - like you've said, most people don't have 4K TV's and here in the USA, I would guesstimate that 1/3 or more of new TV sales are still 1080. When I walk the stores, there are still many 1080 selections and they still have to mark the 4K TV's with a sign saying they are 4K.

Now, when will everyone get 4K? I think sooner than later. This isn't because of a need, but because the reliability of these electronics is pitiful these days. Very cheap and poor components goes into these, and people are having to replace 3-5 year cycle. That and at least in the US, there's that desire to have the latest and greatest even though it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter because there's almost no 4K content available yet. In fact, when it comes to cable packages - they aren't close to getting full 1080 content, heck, there's a lot of stuff that isn't even 720.

So, let us assume for a moment that finally - all TV channels are 1080 finally once and for all. Are they really 1080? They are in RESOLUTION, but not in QUALITY. There's a lot of compression and processing going on - and none of the on-air or cable stuff is true 1080 high def quality as you would get with say a Bluray video or PC video mastered at top quality.

That said....

Watching a 1080 video at it's absolute best potential is pretty amazing, many years after this became the "standard" ...and I believe more than satisfies the vast majority of end users.

Thus, people are really limited to professionally shot and produced content delivered to their TV via Blueray or PC to be able to take any advantage. A 4K GoPro does not count. These lower level video recording devices, including most DSLR and mirrorless are not capturing the quality necessary to take full advantage. They are recording to that resolution, but not to the quality level that resolution is capable of.


That explains my hostility toward all this 4K stuff in these forums. It's pointless to some extent. Unless you buy high end professional video gear, use the best lenses, use professional technique and support equipment - the end result will look like ass. Sorry for the crude expression, but 8K wouldn't help one bit if not shot to the capability of the format.

Why are people paying top dollar for access to something that doesn't exist?

The TV's in the stores look amazing, because they are looping a promotional video shot in 4K with the best possible production. Then consumers take the TV home to watch highly compressed 1080 cable or netflix, and an occasional Bluray.

By the time enough real 4K comes around, the TV's will have dropped in price - or there will be much newer models with superior LED technology.


In short, to maximize 4K capability requires professional production. Whether people like to hear it or not - that's the facts. It's the same situation with high resolution DSLR. The 5DSR, to really take advantage of it for stills requires proper technique. Running and gunning with it diminishes its max potential quite a bit. Same with medium format. For video, the quality is so high now - that for the first time a threshold has been reached where higher production standards are necessary to take advantage. It's not like the VHS days where perfect technique could be overlooked because the format just couldn't capture the quality and detail.


This is why 4K isn't a big deal in DSLR or Mirrorless cameras. Canon, being a PRACTICAL company - knows this. But marketing hype and consumer craze and drive is not practical thinking. It just wants numbers.

Want great 4K? Canon offers it in the proper place - within their professional line ups, where you could actually make use of it to deliver.

The desire for 4K is a want, not a need at this point, for most consumers. As one of the 4K harpers and Canon loyalist, my point is that Canon deliberately holds these features back when it could obtain continued customer loyalty and increased sales from prosumers and professionals like us by providing these features unhindered.

As a prosumer and professional video person, I need to ensure I'm future proofing for 4K because, as the above poster noted, everyone will have 4K TVs someday and I want my content to be state of the art and stand up to future viewing. It's a good feeling, knowing that when you use a product, and it makes you buy more of said product. Not every consumer or prosumer needs 4K in a DSLR or mirrorless, just like no one needs increased AF points or Dual Pixel autofocus. People have been taking great pictures without it for years.

It's the continued hobbling of video aspects that irks Canon fans like myself. And hey, it's their prerogative. I just think they could gain increasing brand loyalty, sales, and value numbers from a whole host of people if they unleashed the floodgates on their DSLR / mirrorless video features.

Myself and many others have taken some #%& on this site for our stance, but I'm going to continue to fight for Canon to deliver value to hybrid shooters on the video front, because in the end, I love their products. If it means I have to good-naturedly duel with people such as Neuro and yourself, so be it. Our postings come from the same place- a desire for Canon to succeed and to have the best products.

 

[JMZawodny]

There are two other images in the series. The one I've added here is a grip-side view. Any ideas what function Canon assigns to the button with the RF-like symbol on it?

 

[horshack]

There are two other images in the series. The one I've added here is a grip-side view. Any ideas what function Canon assigns to the button with the RF-like symbol on it?

Looks like a Wi-Fi toggle.

 

[Alastair Norcross]

There are two other images in the series. The one I've added here is a grip-side view. Any ideas what function Canon assigns to the button with the RF-like symbol on it?

Looks like a Wi-Fi toggle.

Yes, that's exactly the same symbol as the wi-fi button on my G7XII, and in the same place. It works very well on the G7XII. I presume it will too on the M5.

 

[Roy2001]

you DO realize the difference in size of sensors there .. right?

You DO realize 4K IS the standard of video shooting right? When people shoot video, they not only want to view it now, but also want to save it for future right? When you want to play your precious family video some day, are you happy with VHS or miniDV, or you wish it is 4K or even 8K?

So I can live with the fact that 4K is hard to achieve on a larger sensor camera, but don't try to persuade people that 4K is not useful.

 

[Roy2001]

Re: --> Proud 4K Post --> Re: More Canon EOS M5 Images & Specifications

The desire for 4K is a want, not a need at this point, for most consumers. As one of the 4K harpers and Canon loyalist, my point is that Canon deliberately holds these features back when it could obtain continued customer loyalty and increased sales from prosumers and professionals like us by providing these features unhindered.

Canon simply cannot make Digic7 to take FF 4k video without overheating.

 

[hubie]

Why no IS for stills? I mean, this is really a feature I am waiting for on Canon DSLRs. I guess they restrict it to not ,ake all IS lenses obsolete... but hey, it's no longer cutting edge technology but state of the art. Times change. Such a feature on the Canon 6D mk II would be a dream (yeye, let me dream )

 

[Roy2001]

<li>Video: FullHD 60fps, 5-axis electronic image stabilization</li>

I am really disappointed that there is no IS in body.