*UPDATED* Is This The Canon EOS M5?
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
OMG nooooooooo.
WTF?! Canon doesn't give a sht about Sony for years, then starts the M line as a different product line, no EVF, small body (great idea)...then finally starting to make better body (M3) and slowly
adding new lenses...we are just about to get there with M5 (we thought at least)...
...and then they change their mind and make a body which is basically a copy of the Sony a7 series???
Adding crapy EVF (sorry but EVF is still sht compared to optical), making it bigger, loosing the size advantage, but still beeing crapy APS-C compared to FF a7 which even has TONS more lenses.
This is madness!!!
Listen Canon, M3 was a good direction just make it better and make lenses like the 70-200/4 for APS-C and EF-M.
U did a great job with the 11-22 and the 22/2.
(Or make it FF as many would like it but u never dare to be that innovative or revolutionary.)
WTF?! Canon doesn't give a sht about Sony for years, then starts the M line as a different product line, no EVF, small body (great idea)...then finally starting to make better body (M3) and slowly
adding new lenses...we are just about to get there with M5 (we thought at least)......and then they change their mind and make a body which is basically a copy of the Sony a7 series???
Adding crapy EVF (sorry but EVF is still sht compared to optical), making it bigger, loosing the size advantage, but still beeing crapy APS-C compared to FF a7 which even has TONS more lenses.
This is madness!!!
Listen Canon, M3 was a good direction just make it better and make lenses like the 70-200/4 for APS-C and EF-M.
U did a great job with the 11-22 and the 22/2.
(Or make it FF as many would like it but u never dare to be that innovative or revolutionary.)
Upvote
0
I'll repeat what I said earlier:
I love what I'm seeing.
Size doesn't matter, the A6300 camera is too small to hold properly anyway.
Just make sure it's light-weight, ~ 400 g.
Most importantly, it must offer DPAF (with AF servo tracking) and touchscreen.
Gimme EF-M 35 mm f/1.4 lens and I'm super happy. Otherwise, I'm alright with current lenses.
I love what I'm seeing.
Size doesn't matter, the A6300 camera is too small to hold properly anyway.
Just make sure it's light-weight, ~ 400 g.
Most importantly, it must offer DPAF (with AF servo tracking) and touchscreen.
Gimme EF-M 35 mm f/1.4 lens and I'm super happy. Otherwise, I'm alright with current lenses.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:Obviously he wants an EF-M 85mm f/2.4 IS STM. Doesn't everyone?AvTvM said:
I really wonder, how many of those wanting "more EF-M lenses" would be willing to pay USD/€ 1000+ for fast, big, heavy EF-M "L" lenses ...
*limited to crop sensor use only*
* limited to on one single camera system only*
* limited to use with consumer-oriented camera bodies only*
I'd consider those folks either masochist ... or stupid.
Before I go and spend € 1500 on an APS-C only lens like an 85mm/1.2 or € 1000+ on some weirdo chinese manual focus f/0.95 lens I will much rather buy an A7R II (in the absence of a Canon equivalent) plus adapter and put an affordable Sigma 85/1.4 or something like it in front ... for even more subject isolation and "king of darkness stuff".
For shallow DOF and low/available light work an FF system is the only sensible way to go - both technically and economically. Totally beyond me, why some people keep calling for "fast" EF-M lenses.
Upvote
0
Re the more primes thing... I don't expect super fast f1.2 and greater lens, what I what is a few extra choices in a package mostly like the 22mm, but I'd accept a faster than f1.8 ef-m prime no larger than a 18-55mm ef-m
So, something wider of at least
Maybe a 15mm f2.8 about the size of the 15-45mm max
The 22mm & 28mm we have
35mm f1.4 no bigger than a 18-55mm and/or
35mm f1.8-2.0 pancake
55mm f1.4 IS no bigger than a 18-55mm
60-70mm f2.8mm IS no bigger than a 18-55mm that doubles as a macro/portrait type solution
So, something wider of at least
Maybe a 15mm f2.8 about the size of the 15-45mm max
The 22mm & 28mm we have
35mm f1.4 no bigger than a 18-55mm and/or
35mm f1.8-2.0 pancake
55mm f1.4 IS no bigger than a 18-55mm
60-70mm f2.8mm IS no bigger than a 18-55mm that doubles as a macro/portrait type solution
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Haydn1971 said:
ok, I see where you are.
I doubt, f/1.4 lenses could be made "good, small and affordable" enough to somehow fit into EF-M line ...
* 35/2.0 pancake should be sizewise and pricewise easy; but f/1.4 size + PRICE !?
* 15mm/f 2.8 sized not larger than 15-45 sounds doable, but unlikely to be optically any better than the excellent 11-22 which might be around f/4.5 at 15mm? Is f/2.8 really needed in UWA lens? Except astro maybe ... for which APS-C is not good solution anyway
* 55/1.4 IS ... we don't even have one in EF mount yet ... ask ahsanford ;D ;-) ... sizewise maybe yes. But number of people willing to pay € 800+ for a crop-only 55/1.4 ? What I could imagine is a EF-M version of 50/1.8 STM, would fit very well into EF-M line.
* 60-70/2.8 IS - sizewise probably possible. Price maybe 400 - could fit into EF-M range.
I still hope for a very compact EF-M 85mm f/2.4 IS STM at around 500 ? ... that's the one I'd buy, especially if there were also a wortwhile new EOS M body to to attach it to.
Upvote
0
I think a few people around here need to take a deep breath, relax, and maybe consider switching to decaf.
I don't get the EVF hate? OVF isn't practical/terribly useful being it is mirrorless, especially as a more compact size. And every other M camera Canon has is void of any viewfinder. So buy an M10 if you want the small EVF-less body. And let those who'll trade a big larger size camera for an EVF buy this new one.
And where's all the hate for Canon developing some more EF-M glass coming from? With the short flange distance and smaller image circle it doesn't require all that much glass to get some decent f/2 even a few f/1.4 primes in the standard focal lengths (A 35mm f/1.4 should be relatively small). They won't be anywhere near the size of their EF counterparts, which makes adapting current EF lenses via adapter fairly clumsy in most cases. Frankly anyone who thinks the lens lineup is good as is doesn't know any better and certainly not taking a look at the competition.
I'm looking forward to seeing the real thing. I'm taking the optimistic approach and am going to believe this will be a very decent camera. I like to think it will be the start of Canon starting to invest a bit into the M line and giving the market some higher end options there. If the M5 is as good as I'm hoping, I expect it will only be a matter of time before we see some faster EF-M primes to accompany this more "up market" camera.
I don't get the EVF hate? OVF isn't practical/terribly useful being it is mirrorless, especially as a more compact size. And every other M camera Canon has is void of any viewfinder. So buy an M10 if you want the small EVF-less body. And let those who'll trade a big larger size camera for an EVF buy this new one.
And where's all the hate for Canon developing some more EF-M glass coming from? With the short flange distance and smaller image circle it doesn't require all that much glass to get some decent f/2 even a few f/1.4 primes in the standard focal lengths (A 35mm f/1.4 should be relatively small). They won't be anywhere near the size of their EF counterparts, which makes adapting current EF lenses via adapter fairly clumsy in most cases. Frankly anyone who thinks the lens lineup is good as is doesn't know any better and certainly not taking a look at the competition.
I'm looking forward to seeing the real thing. I'm taking the optimistic approach and am going to believe this will be a very decent camera. I like to think it will be the start of Canon starting to invest a bit into the M line and giving the market some higher end options there. If the M5 is as good as I'm hoping, I expect it will only be a matter of time before we see some faster EF-M primes to accompany this more "up market" camera.
Upvote
0
It seems that there's a real market for high-end lens limited to "small" sensors. Olympus "Pro" range is expending (3 new lenses to be announced soon) and all that expensive Fuji-X lenses seems tto sell as well.AvTvM said:
Granted that Canon has A FF market to protect, but the lenses size advantage is real (especially with µ4/3).
On the other hand, the lenses size/weight advantage with mirorless FF is barely noticeable.
Upvote
0
hachu21 said:
well, philosophies differ. I prefer larger-sensor cameras with smaller, less-fast, cheaper lenses to get a certain capability rather than buying a small-sensored camera with really expensive glass. Typoically I have 1 or 2 cameras, but many more lenses.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
Samyang seem to be able to build good manual lenses at f1.2 at the right size for EF-M, so I'm not entirely convinced that Canon couldn't do f1.4 for EF-M, the market is perhaps too small globally for such thing.
Take a read of Dustin's excellent reviews on the Samyang lenses...
http://dustinabbott.net/2016/03/rokinon-50mm-f1-2-as-umc-review/
Upvote
0
Similar threads
