More Canon EOS M5 Images & Specifications

[9VIII]

Some people seem to be confused about the ''electronic stabilization''.

It's not for shooting stills. it's not IBIS. The sensor doesn't move.

It's an algorithm moves the video image (not sensor) to corrent for shake. So to get a place to move the image in, you need to use a smaller portion of the sensor, hence crop.

It's IS for video mode that crops the image a little.

Note** Canon history for this feature implementation shows pretty much just as good as IBIS performance for video. It's pretty amazing what they achieve with just electronic IS. with Optical IS lens + Electronic (mode 3 on M3) it's ridiculous. It really is a fantastic IS for video.

Note2** 1080p on the M3 is one of the best around. Better than A6000/6300, Fuji, Olympus, NX1, it's very detailed with very little aliasing/moire. I can see using this as a professional video rig. I always utilise shallow DOF for my audience. This love it. And the fight with that has always been stability (fast lenses have to IS, long lenses are jittery as hell) and Focusing.

For the first, I use a shoulder rig. A large and heavy piece of equipment and always cursing why canon don't just f+--ing give me a fast lens with IS like a 50mm/135mm IS, so that I could just handhold the camera and shoot FREELY focusing on focusing and framing.

With DPAF, it even takea focusing off the focus list. So I can just shoot with the camera using any lens and get stable in-focus video. What a life saver for weddings for example.

The IS will allow me to use my absolutely amazing Russian M42 glass that has zeiss optics for video, so far I cannot use the 135mm f/3.5 aside from select tripod shots (a shame because it looks amazing) and helios 58, anf of course the non IS Canon 50mm 1.8 STM and 135mm f2 (my two go-to-lenses). It breads live into these lenses while I've been restricted to a shoulder rig for all of them. If the performance is as good as the powershot electronic IS or M3 , I'll be ditching my rig and shooting handheld from now on. Liberating.

Sonys offered this for a little while (Is not Focusing) but I am a colour freak, and find that Canon's picture styles give unparalelled colour science compared to the anemic Sony colours so I never made the switch.

For films/docs dialed down Neutral gives Superb colours with very little tweaking to get an awesome image, and for weddings and people Portrait PS gives a skin tone rendition unlike anything else, just ALIVE. Try to get these from S-Log and your image will fall apart before reaching it simply because they are weak 8bit 4:2:0 h.264 images made for delivery. So getting internal good colour science is vital for video shooting.

My 150$ Eos M takes better colours than the 3000$ A7s. side by side, no comparison. (although the later is sharper and has IS)

You never owned 135mm f/2, EOS M... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=30531.msg619510#msg619510
Ebrahim (http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/20260-how-i-got-scammed-through-one-of-this-sites-highest-rated-accounts/?do=findComment&comment=154344), please stop lying.

That's pretty disgusting behavior for a human being, thanks for the heads up.

 

[rrcphoto]

Thank-you Canon.

This ticks all but one of my boxes and makes me glad I held on to the M I bought on the fire sale and the adapters and native m lenses and resisted the M2 and 3

I'm getting older and having a couple of bodies slung or attached to a harness for a few hours is getting painfull but then so was trying to use the m for event work even in bright light.

I want something smaller but I didn't want to lose my investment in L glass and spend the $10 to $15K moving to Fugi would entail. Most of my shooting now is just for myself and the family.

I shoot about 10 minutes of video a year and 1080p is just fine by me.

As an ex broadcast engineer who sat in some of the original 422 SMTPE sessions I will say that 1080p even on Netflix with their aggressive compression looks pretty damned good to these old tired eyes on my 55" display heck I have content on my media server from 20 odd years ago shot on VHS and yes it would be better in 1080p but something about the best camera being the one in hand comes to mind. In our family most of the video is shot on the wife's iPhone and edited on her iPad Air and not on my Xeon workstation.

The one feature I want that seems to be missing is GPS. What I still shoot are monuments at cemeteries and the 6D with a 17-40L is the cats meow for this. But spend a day roasting in the sun crouching (perspective warp will only fix so much) shooting 1000+ memorials and these old bones hurt. Yes, I know you can use an external GPS and import into LR but that's just adding pain to the workflow.

WRT reliability of SD cards ... I learned the hard way that good CF cards were a sound investment and always have a collection of Lexar or SanDisk Pro cards on hand that I rotate through. I've carried this practice forward with newer bodies with SD cards and I've recently had my first card failure. It was at the end of the day, the last card available and the light was going. The dam card wouldn't work and it was Sunday and I was at a rural location an hour and 1/2 from the nearest city. As luck would have it I remembered the local town had a big box drugstore that usually stocks mid range cards.

So thank-you Canon. Waiting to pre order. I think some of the Serenar lenses I inherited from my dad will look nice on this body.

what you may want to do is get a EF-M to FD,etc shift lens .. and get some cheap FD primes.

that would help with the perspective shifting and may let you stand for most of that with same a 35 or 50mm prime on a shift lens.

 

[LesC]

The one feature I want that seems to be missing is GPS. What I still shoot are monuments at cemeteries and the 6D with a 17-40L is the cats meow for this. But spend a day roasting in the sun crouching (perspective warp will only fix so much) shooting 1000+ memorials and these old bones hurt. Yes, I know you can use an external GPS and import into LR but that's just adding pain to the workflow.

Hopefully the GP-E2 GPS unit will be compatible if GPS isn't included - not ideal but it's not too large.

 

[rrcphoto]

The one feature I want that seems to be missing is GPS. What I still shoot are monuments at cemeteries and the 6D with a 17-40L is the cats meow for this. But spend a day roasting in the sun crouching (perspective warp will only fix so much) shooting 1000+ memorials and these old bones hurt. Yes, I know you can use an external GPS and import into LR but that's just adding pain to the workflow.

Hopefully the GP-E2 GPS unit will be compatible if GPS isn't included - not ideal but it's not too large.

Or use your smartphone as the gps, since it has an always on Bluetooth connection.

 

[asl]

You seem to enjoy bashing anything by Canon...

Not at all. There's no enjoyment in it.
As a almost life long Canon user since the first EOS 650 film DSLR, I am disappointed that their offerings don't always meet my expectation. Particularly on the video front.

Perhaps you should read http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=30754.msg622233#msg622233 or perhaps you could view my EOS M Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/lozwilkes/albums/72157634770186305 or other Canon specific albums first before making such comments.

Have you seen me on here bashing Canon's FF cameras, or lenses, or flash system - which I think are all great?
No, I have specifically bashed the M series because it failed to progress in line with the competition. And I have bashed the 80D because I thought it was such a disappointing improvement over my 70D. I was expecting more.

So, in the meantime, I will continue to "bash" Canon wherever I see fit if I think they are underperforming. What a poor world it would be if the only thing allowed in forums was fanboyism, as unfortunately exhibited by some here...

+1.

 

[AvTvM]

hmm, comparing size/weight from rumored specs. As feared, it really is as bulky as an SL-1 and much higher than Sony A6300 due to that whale hump on top ...

Canon EOS M5 .............. 115.6 x 89.2 x 60.6 mm, 427g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS 100D/SL-1 ... 117 x 91 x 69 mm, 407g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS M3 .............. 111 x 68 x 44 mm, 366g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS M ................ 109 x 67 x 32 mm, 298g, crop 1.6x
Sony A6300 .................. 120 x 66.9 x 48.8 mm, 361g, crop 1.5x
Sony A7R II .................. 126.9 x 95.7 x 60.3 mm, 582g, FULL FRAME

While not really big, I still find it rather big for a crop sensor cam. Sony manages to fit a FF sensor into this body size. For my use - travel, always on, mpounatainmeering cam ... I was hoping for a more compact package, ideally with pop-up EVF (like e.g. Sony RX1R II).

Now let's see if Canon finally put a regular LP-E6N into the larger grip for decent juice, or whether it will again be just another model-specific, not-backwards compatible, puny, weak, dwarf, toy battery ... NB-xxL.

 

[Etienne]

Some people seem to be confused about the ''electronic stabilization''.

It's not for shooting stills. it's not IBIS. The sensor doesn't move.

It's an algorithm moves the video image (not sensor) to corrent for shake. So to get a place to move the image in, you need to use a smaller portion of the sensor, hence crop.

It's IS for video mode that crops the image a little.

Note** Canon history for this feature implementation shows pretty much just as good as IBIS performance for video. It's pretty amazing what they achieve with just electronic IS. with Optical IS lens + Electronic (mode 3 on M3) it's ridiculous. It really is a fantastic IS for video.

Note2** 1080p on the M3 is one of the best around. Better than A6000/6300, Fuji, Olympus, NX1, it's very detailed with very little aliasing/moire. I can see using this as a professional video rig. I always utilise shallow DOF for my audience. This love it. And the fight with that has always been stability (fast lenses have to IS, long lenses are jittery as hell) and Focusing.

For the first, I use a shoulder rig. A large and heavy piece of equipment and always cursing why canon don't just f+--ing give me a fast lens with IS like a 50mm/135mm IS, so that I could just handhold the camera and shoot FREELY focusing on focusing and framing.

With DPAF, it even takea focusing off the focus list. So I can just shoot with the camera using any lens and get stable in-focus video. What a life saver for weddings for example.

The IS will allow me to use my absolutely amazing Russian M42 glass that has zeiss optics for video, so far I cannot use the 135mm f/3.5 aside from select tripod shots (a shame because it looks amazing) and helios 58, anf of course the non IS Canon 50mm 1.8 STM and 135mm f2 (my two go-to-lenses). It breads live into these lenses while I've been restricted to a shoulder rig for all of them. If the performance is as good as the powershot electronic IS or M3 , I'll be ditching my rig and shooting handheld from now on. Liberating.

Sonys offered this for a little while (Is not Focusing) but I am a colour freak, and find that Canon's picture styles give unparalelled colour science compared to the anemic Sony colours so I never made the switch.

For films/docs dialed down Neutral gives Superb colours with very little tweaking to get an awesome image, and for weddings and people Portrait PS gives a skin tone rendition unlike anything else, just ALIVE. Try to get these from S-Log and your image will fall apart before reaching it simply because they are weak 8bit 4:2:0 h.264 images made for delivery. So getting internal good colour science is vital for video shooting.

My 150$ Eos M takes better colours than the 3000$ A7s. side by side, no comparison. (although the later is sharper and has IS)

You never owned 135mm f/2, EOS M... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=30531.msg619510#msg619510
Ebrahim (http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/20260-how-i-got-scammed-through-one-of-this-sites-highest-rated-accounts/?do=findComment&comment=154344), please stop lying.

That's pretty disgusting behavior for a human being, thanks for the heads up.

+1000 .... Thanks for the heads up.

His scam on EOSHD was unconscionable, and his follow up responses demonstrate clearly that this guy is a sociopath (no joke, read the EOSHD exchange). We should spread awareness of this sociopath on every camera, video and photography forum.

 

[Stu_bert]

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

You DO realize 4K IS the standard of video shooting right?

there is no "standard" of video shooting.. lol.

in actuality most broadcast standards are still 1080p24/30

I think his point is fair in terms of shooting vs broadcast. Many commercial organisations have been recording in 4K and building up content.

In the UK for instance, BBC has been building up a large mass of 4K content, admittedly in nature etc

http://advanced-television.com/2016/06/27/bbc-readies-for-uhdhdr-transmissions/

 

[Stu_bert]

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.

Except you miss the crucial element that in terms of households that number is a lot higher therefore. Sky will only hold details of the primary subscriber, not the size of the household. Your children & wife have sky, but probably you pay for it ;D

If you take the average household as being 2.2 children + 2 adults then the actual % population which has access to Sky is significant. More than 50% and therefore a majority? I wouldnt guess, but I wouldnt be surprised if it were close to half...

 

[lw]

Except you miss the crucial element that in terms of households that number is a lot higher therefore. Sky will only hold details of the primary subscriber, not the size of the household. Your children & wife have sky, but probably you pay for it ;D

If you take the average household as being 2.2 children + 2 adults then the actual % population which has access to Sky is significant. More than 50% and therefore a majority? I wouldnt guess, but I wouldnt be surprised if it were close to half...

Yes. It's 12.5m households (as at June 2016) not 12m people. And that doesn't include another 4m households who are subscribers to Sky via Virgin and BT who have their own 4K services.

There are 26m households in the UK. So less then half are direct customers of Sky, but more than half have access to Sky channels. In total 18m households have pay TV from Sky, BT and Virgin. I don't know whether Sky make their 4K broadcasts available via BT or Virgin though. Once you factor in things like Netflix (another 4K provider) , over 70% of UK households now have Pay TV in one form or another. So it is the norm now, not a luxury.

Anyway, we digress. So I will say no more on this topic.

 

[ggweci]

hmm, comparing size/weight from rumored specs. As feared, it really is as bulky as an SL-1 and much higher than Sony A6300 due to that whale hump on top ...

Canon EOS M5 .............. 115.6 x 89.2 x 60.6 mm, 427g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS 100D/SL-1 ... 117 x 91 x 69 mm, 407g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS M3 .............. 111 x 68 x 44 mm, 366g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS M ................ 109 x 67 x 32 mm, 298g, crop 1.6x
Sony A6300 .................. 120 x 66.9 x 48.8 mm, 361g, crop 1.5x
Sony A7R II .................. 126.9 x 95.7 x 60.3 mm, 582g, FULL FRAME

While not really big, I still find it rather big for a crop sensor cam. Sony manages to fit a FF sensor into this body size. For my use - travel, always on, mpounatainmeering cam ... I was hoping for a more compact package, ideally with pop-up EVF (like e.g. Sony RX1R II).

Now let's see if Canon finally put a regular LP-E6N into the larger grip for decent juice, or whether it will again be just another model-specific, not-backwards compatible, puny, weak, dwarf, toy battery ... NB-xxL.

I expect that the M5 will "feel" much smaller that the SL1 even though the measurements seem similar. I thickness of the M5 includes the substantial grip and protruding EVF, whereas the SL1 is mainly due to the requirement of the mirror box. The actually volume of the SL1 would be a fair bit greater.

I think the M5 body is slightly thicker than the M3, based on what I can decipher from the size of hot hotshot, but overall pretty close. Also, the added depth of the grip (which looks to help ergonomics tremendously vs the original Ms), will not be a concern once you at a lens, even the pancake.

As the Sony's current A7 models, yes they are very compact given the sensor, but once you throw a lens on there, they get big fast (unless you stick to their 35mm f2.8 pancake).

I know this is not apples to apples, as the Sony is FF f4 constant, but check out this comparison with the UW zooms - Canon M vs SL1 vs A7Rii

http://camerasize.com/compact/#599.386,448.424,624.440,ha,t

The M definitely offers size advantages vs even the Canon crops.

If you can stick with just the pancakes for your travel camera, the the A7's are mighty tempting.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#599.349,448.439,624.394,ha,t

 

[Etienne]

hmm, comparing size/weight from rumored specs. As feared, it really is as bulky as an SL-1 and much higher than Sony A6300 due to that whale hump on top ...

Canon EOS M5 .............. 115.6 x 89.2 x 60.6 mm, 427g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS 100D/SL-1 ... 117 x 91 x 69 mm, 407g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS M3 .............. 111 x 68 x 44 mm, 366g, crop 1.6x
Canon EOS M ................ 109 x 67 x 32 mm, 298g, crop 1.6x
Sony A6300 .................. 120 x 66.9 x 48.8 mm, 361g, crop 1.5x
Sony A7R II .................. 126.9 x 95.7 x 60.3 mm, 582g, FULL FRAME

While not really big, I still find it rather big for a crop sensor cam. Sony manages to fit a FF sensor into this body size. For my use - travel, always on, mpounatainmeering cam ... I was hoping for a more compact package, ideally with pop-up EVF (like e.g. Sony RX1R II).

Now let's see if Canon finally put a regular LP-E6N into the larger grip for decent juice, or whether it will again be just another model-specific, not-backwards compatible, puny, weak, dwarf, toy battery ... NB-xxL.

I expect that the M5 will "feel" much smaller that the SL1 even though the measurements seem similar. I thickness of the M5 includes the substantial grip and protruding EVF, whereas the SL1 is mainly due to the requirement of the mirror box. The actually volume of the SL1 would be a fair bit greater.

I think the M5 body is slightly thicker than the M3, based on what I can decipher from the size of hot hotshot, but overall pretty close. Also, the added depth of the grip (which looks to help ergonomics tremendously vs the original Ms), will not be a concern once you at a lens, even the pancake.

As the Sony's current A7 models, yes they are very compact given the sensor, but once you throw a lens on there, they get big fast (unless you stick to their 35mm f2.8 pancake).

I know this is not apples to apples, as the Sony is FF f4 constant, but check out this comparison with the UW zooms - Canon M vs SL1 vs A7Rii

http://camerasize.com/compact/#599.386,448.424,624.440,ha,t

The M definitely offers size advantages vs even the Canon crops.

If you can stick with just the pancakes for your travel camera, the the A7's are mighty tempting.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#599.349,448.439,624.394,ha,t

Agreed. The size and weight look great to me. Too small quickly becomes impossible-to-use except in full automatic.

 

[privatebydesign]

I made gif's in the thread that beat this one to the punch.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=30753.msg622025#msg622025

 

[AvTvM]

I expect that the M5 will "feel" much smaller that the SL1 even though the measurements seem similar. I thickness of the M5 includes the substantial grip and protruding EVF, whereas the SL1 is mainly due to the requirement of the mirror box. The actually volume of the SL1 would be a fair bit greater.

I think the M5 body is slightly thicker than the M3, based on what I can decipher from the size of hot hotshot, but overall pretty close. Also, the added depth of the grip (which looks to help ergonomics tremendously vs the original Ms), will not be a concern once you at a lens, even the pancake.

I don't take issue so much with the grip - IF (!) Canon made it bigger to accomodate a real battery [LP-E6N, 11+ Whrs] instead of a yet another whimpy toy battery. I am more bothered with the hump on top.

My "dream form factor" definitely is the Sony RX1R II ... would have relly loved to get a Canon M5 in that type of form factor with corner pop-up EVF, even with a crop sensor inside, not FF ... I am fully aware of FF lens size, weight and cost. Unfortunately that Sony costs an arm and a leg and more importantly, it's lens is bolted on. If Sony would make the RX1R II with an FE mount up front, I would likely get it.

My EOS M with 18-55 or 22/2 comes with me in a small LoePro Dashpoint 30 bag mounted on the left side strap of my backpack, so I have immediate access to it all the time, even when climbing. If deired, I put another, smaller LowePro Dashpoint 20 on the other side backpack strap - it holds 55-200 perfectly. Or 11-22, so I got fully access to camera and 2 or 3 lenses. Also on city trips / vacations etc.

With M5 this will not be possible - too bulky and on the heavy side too. Which means, it will go into the backpack, I will carry it along all the time, but hardly take any pictures ... might as well take my 5D3 + 24-70 II along ... which I don't .. too bulky and too heavy. See the dilemma? All I want is a very compact M with built-in EVF and good performance, including AF and fully competitive IQ.

 

[Crosswind]

I cannot open the EOS 80D RAW files with LR5, so I guess the same would apply for EOS M5 RAW files. Do I have to pay for LR6?

 

[9VIII]

I expect that the M5 will "feel" much smaller that the SL1 even though the measurements seem similar. I thickness of the M5 includes the substantial grip and protruding EVF, whereas the SL1 is mainly due to the requirement of the mirror box. The actually volume of the SL1 would be a fair bit greater.

I think the M5 body is slightly thicker than the M3, based on what I can decipher from the size of hot hotshot, but overall pretty close. Also, the added depth of the grip (which looks to help ergonomics tremendously vs the original Ms), will not be a concern once you at a lens, even the pancake.

I don't take issue so much with the grip - IF (!) Canon made it bigger to accomodate a real battery [LP-E6N, 11+ Whrs] instead of a yet another whimpy toy battery. I am more bothered with the hump on top.

My "dream form factor" definitely is the Sony RX1R II ... would have relly loved to get a Canon M5 in that type of form factor with corner pop-up EVF, even with a crop sensor inside, not FF ... I am fully aware of FF lens size, weight and cost. Unfortunately that Sony costs an arm and a leg and more importantly, it's lens is bolted on. If Sony would make the RX1R II with an FE mount up front, I would likely get it.

My EOS M with 18-55 or 22/2 comes with me in a small LoePro Dashpoint 30 bag mounted on the left side strap of my backpack, so I have immediate access to it all the time, even when climbing. If deired, I put another, smaller LowePro Dashpoint 20 on the other side backpack strap - it holds 55-200 perfectly. Or 11-22, so I got fully access to camera and 2 or 3 lenses. Also on city trips / vacations etc.

With M5 this will not be possible - too bulky and on the heavy side too. Which means, it will go into the backpack, I will carry it along all the time, but hardly take any pictures ... might as well take my 5D3 + 24-70 II along ... which I don't .. too bulky and too heavy. See the dilemma? All I want is a very compact M with built-in EVF and good performance, including AF and fully competitive IQ.

I can agree that I wish this was a rangefinder style, but sales figures across the ILC market disagree with my preference.
We're just going to have to hope that Canon tries making a Rangefinder equivalent.

 

[Haydn1971]

I can agree that I wish this was a rangefinder style, but sales figures across the ILC market disagree with my preference.
We're just going to have to hope that Canon tries making a Rangefinder equivalent.

To be fair, the M and M10 are this... We just need more pancake primes ! #stuckrecord

 

[Steve_FR]

I cannot open the EOS 80D RAW files with LR5, so I guess the same would apply for EOS M5 RAW files. Do I have to pay for LR6?

You could download Adobe DNG Converter, and convert your raw files to .DNG. It is an extra step, but helps you get your files open, and it's free.

 

[ggweci]

My "dream form factor" definitely is the Sony RX1R II ... would have relly loved to get a Canon M5 in that type of form factor with corner pop-up EVF, even with a crop sensor inside, not FF ... I am fully aware of FF lens size, weight and cost. Unfortunately that Sony costs an arm and a leg and more importantly, it's lens is bolted on. If Sony would make the RX1R II with an FE mount up front, I would likely get it.

I definitely agree that the RX1R II form factor is ideal. That pop-up EVF design is excellent, allowing for the very compact design. Would love one, but like you, price is a way out of my range.

If the made an FE mount version, I don't think you'd be happy with that, however. The lenses would be too large for the compact body. The 35mm on the RX1s is recessed deep into the body, keeping the overall pkg small.

I've read some rumours of an "RX200" which could be an APS-C version of the RX1. If they could throw in a 24-50mm equiv short soom, with large aperture, while keeping it in the same size housing as the RX1R II, that would be a perfect walk around camera - usable range, great IQ, compact, EVF. Drool.

 

[svenski]

any idea on the EVF resolution

I might have missed this but has anyone got an idea what resolution and refresh rate the EVF has?