What Do You Want to See in the EOS M System?

[Quackator]

(...) Almost buy it but then I remembered my latest iPhone can do better for still shots.

Interesting. How do you manage to change lenses?

 

[Mr1Dx]

(...) Almost buy it but then I remembered my latest iPhone can do better for still shots.

Interesting. How do you manage to change lenses?

Snap photography does not need much lenses. Again, it's good enough to track high speed snail race.

If I really want high quality mirrorless lenses, my batis25/85, fe35 1.4 and fe55 will be the ones. Btw...let's me know how you like your 6400iso 12000iso in low light photography with your crop m sensor. And yet, don't forget to bring a tripod for your crop mirrorless for cleaner images. What a wonderful product!

 

[scottgoh]

something comparable to the Sony full frame system and can use the EF lenses.

 

[lw]

Many comments here seem to have wandered away from answering the core question - what do you want to see in the EOS M System?

If we except that the EOS M system is Canon's APS-C Mirrorless system - and not FF (If Canon did an FF MILC I think it would have a different name and mount - to avoid confusion) - then my wishes for the M4 are straightforward.

Give me everything that a Panasonic GX8 has - but with a 24mp (or higher) APS-C sensor. That sensor could fit easily in that body I would think, given it is larger than the M3.
It has all the bells and whistles anyone could wish for. Controls, Decent AF, decent performance, IBIS (though Canon may never do that in any camera...), large hi-res EVF, 4K, etc, etc. Yet doesn't cost a fortune.

Anything less than that, and I may as well just buy the GX8... As a Canon user who was an M user but decided to dump the system when the M2 and then the M3 didn't live up to my expectations, I really would like to see the M4 finally 'nailing it'.
I don't want to buy into another system, but if Canon are going to continue to deliver sub-par MILCs, then I will sacrifice that extra bit of sensor performance for a whole lot better features and functions. (and stick to Canon DSLR when the best IQ is required)

 

[WorkonSunday]

i really like my M3, but im also an A7r/A6000/XE1 user.

i would love to see:

- usb charging
- build-in EVF
- faster AF support using full-size EF lens.
- why they make it so hard to use grey card to set white balance....
- stronger/more well built dial/wheel.
- add an easier-to-assess MF override + magnifying/focus assist button.
- please just copy the sony 16-70mm F4.... it really is an awesome walk-around for tiny aps-c.

 

[Quackator]

i would love to see:
- usb charging

Only with better plugs and easier to service faulty connections.
LEMO style plugs would be okay.

I have had faulty plugs on more than half of my cameras over time.
Those small mini connectors for all plugs are a constant source of problems.

- why they make it so hard to use grey card to set white balance....

It's actually not different from before: Shoot a picture
of a grey card and select custom WB on that.
Custom WB is a wise selection for the "my menu"-tab.

The beauty in the Canon solution vs the Nikon solution
is that you can save hundreds of WB reference files on
your card if you like, and return to them whenever you
want, with exactly the same color as last time.

 

[jd7]

Until the functional limitations of mirrorless are overcome (particularly in terms of AF, also battery life and ergonomics), I won't consider a MILC as a dSLR replacement. Therefore, the key desire for me is size/portability. I like the size of the M2.

What I'd like to see are a few more native lenses, particularly a fast(ish) short tele prime.

+1. This.

That pretty much sums up my view as well.

 

[jd7]

<p>Sound off in the forum</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>[/html]

Ha! You all know Canon would never build this. It would compete with it's own DSLR's and might take sales away. Or, if Canon does build something like it, it would be so crippled, again so not to compete with it's own offering's, it would be yet another sales dog like the M series has been

I just don't understand the thinking here. If a customer buys a canon camera, or at least an interchange lens one, why would canon care whether that is a dslr or mirrorless? Assuming canon is able to charge a similar mark up, canon is making similar money either way.

 

[Solar Eagle]

What is the point of a mirrorless camera if it is the size and price of a 5D and uses the same lenses? Fewer buttons? "Woohoo look at my thinner 5D with no buttons that uses an EF mount adapter instead of a mirror box!!! It's awesome! It even has a small selection of its own FF EF-M lenses which save me one full inch in lens length!!! YES!".

 

[mb66energy]

Just what I would like to see is depicted vaguely in the attached image.

I would really really like 3 or 4 wheels to choose settings and one or more small (OLED?) displays which show up the parameter description and the parameter value for those who like direct control over relevant parameters.

Aligning the outer diameter of the mount to the right releases enough space for the bulky grip which doesn't compromise outer dimensions but gives more volume for a larger battery, some "hot" electronics to keep it far from the sensor and better handling of a small body.

 

[Quackator]

What is the point of a mirrorless camera if it is the size and price of a 5D and uses the same lenses?

Mirrorless will show you the resulting depth of field
while shooting and still not go dark in the finder.

Mirrorless will show your subject as bright as you
are going to record it, and not as dark as your
eyesight really is.

Mirrorless can spread AF fields far better across
the image than DSLRs can.

Mirrorless doesn't need dark time when the mirror
flaps up and down.

Mirrorless can give you much higher frame rates
than a DSLR can.

And more. Size is collateral with most mirrorless
cameras, but since human fingers don't scale down
along the camera, many people see this rather as
counterproductive.

 

[Loswr]

- why they make it so hard to use grey card to set white balance....

It's actually not different from before: Shoot a picture
of a grey card and select custom WB on that.
Custom WB is a wise selection for the "my menu"-tab.

Shoot RAW.

 

[Quackator]

Shoot RAW.

Yada, yada. Raw alone won't help you to achieve exactly the same WB as the day before,
or the month before, unless you have a reliable neutral reference in the picture.

Holding a grey card a little different from last time might give you a small color shift.
One you might not notice, but a color critical client might.

Having a tried and tested reference image saved will give you extra production safety.
Of course this counts for RAW shooters (who isn't?) just the same.

 

[Loswr]

Shoot RAW.

Yada, yada. Raw alone won't help you to achieve exactly the same WB as the day before,
or the month before, unless you have a reliable neutral reference in the picture.

Holding a grey card a little different from last time might give you a small color shift.
One you might not notice, but a color critical client might.

Having a tried and tested reference image saved will give you extra production safety.
Of course this counts for RAW shooters (who isn't?) just the same.

That should work, because light never changes. :

Of course, even if your white balance is perfect, your color critical client will notice that other colors are off. If you want to properly manage all colors, not just white, then a custom WB won't help.

But if saying yada yada and inadequate color management make you happy, by all means keep it up!

 

[Quackator]

That should work, because light never changes. :

In some locations it won't.

Maintaining a stock of WB references for locations you might
revisit again is certainly good practice and will in most situations
deliver very good and consistent results from start.

You are free to use overlord color management on top of that, brainiac.

 

[Loswr]

That should work, because light never changes. :

In some locations it won't.

Maintaining a stock of WB references for locations you might
revisit again is certainly good practice and will in most situations
deliver very good and consistent results from start.

You are free to use overlord color management on top of that, brainiac.

Seriously, it takes the same amount of time to just shoot an appropriate reference (WhiBal, SpiderCube, ColorChecker) as to find your custom WB. That's much better than hoping the light is still the same (most light sources change temperature over time). The only reason for a custom WB in camera is if you're shooting JPG, but in that case you're still better off shooting the reference at the time you're doing the shoot. Unless it's not really that important, in which case the Auto WB is probably good enough anyway, quack.

 

[Bernard]

Mirrorless will show you the resulting depth of field while shooting and still not go dark in the finder.

Modern screens really don't get that dark. Plus all SLRs have live-view.

Mirrorless will show your subject as bright as you are going to record it, and not as dark as your eyesight really is.

Mirrorless and live view-average-out your subject to a medium grey. They are far from realistic when you shoot a high-key or a low-key subject, or anything contrasty, or anything with multiple light sources and/or color temperatures.

Mirrorless can spread AF fields far better across the image than DSLRs can.

I don't use AF, so I don't really care about having an AF field in the lower left corner for bragging rights.

Mirrorless doesn't need dark time when the mirror flaps up and down.

What's better, a brief black-out that's exactly like a blink (something your eye naturally does 20 times a minute), or a frozen frame? The latter bothers me more, but it's a personal thing.

Mirrorless can give you much higher frame rates than a DSLR can.

How high do you need? As far as I am concerned, anything 24fps and above is video, which you can shoot with all DSLRs. Is there a frame rate between the 1dx (12 fps) and 23.997 fps video that is critical to you?

 

[josephandrews222]

I thought the topic is about mirrorless. Since we are talking about mirrorless, can you tell me who #1?

None of us have reliable sales numbers.

I have been offered twice to buy into a competitor system at a very
generous 50% discount price - and turned down twice.

At some point, the EOS M was rumored to be #3 in sales in Japan,
with Canon allegedly holding 9% market share in Japan.
Imagine, with a camera that so many people deem less useful
than a pound of chimpanzee crap.
Looking at my inventory of M & M3 plus lenses, Canon is probably
doing not half as bad as many people think.

Without reliable data, this is pure speculation, of course.

True story....there was an opened unitt of m1 at local camera shop and I got an offer at $125 US by store manager. Almost buy it but then I remembered my latest iPhone can do better for still shots.

You know why the m does well in Japan? How the m does in other regions?

Come again?!

 

[JMZawodny]

By the time they did enough to the M to make me interested, it would be an SLR.

Bingo! +10

That is what is wrong with the entire premise of this thread. You post an open question like this and what you get in response is a bunch of replies from folks who basically do not like the premise of an M-series camera. Ultimately they want 1DX2 functionality in a SL1 frame.

I have the original M and have used the new M10. The size is perfect. Bigger is rarely better. Of all of the suggestions made in/by the OP, an integral EVF and some fast primes are the only ones I would want. If that can't do what you need, use a different camera.

For what/who this camera was intended to be used for/by, I think that Canon should not stray too far from the current path.

 

[infared]

I would love to see Canon produce a really serious FF mirrorless camera set up like an Olympus EM1 or EM5 II, with multi-functional dual dials on top that you put between your fingers (great set-up). To me the "M" is a non-effort submission to mirrorless photography. So I am asking for a different camera...not an "M".Also, have function buttons (video button as well) that are totally and extremely customizable so that one can set the camera up just the way they want. I would want it to have a new improved FF sensor (~25MP), and handle all my EOS-mount lenses without an adapter of any kind. It could (and would) be a relatively large camera, but that is ok as it would be balancing out with my large lenses. I would like the body to have focus assisting aids in VF like zebra striping etc. an optional global shutter would be a nice added feature. I personally prefer the fluid nature of the way a mirrorless camera handles and LOVE being able to look in the VF and review and enlarge in the VF on site to check focus, composition, etc. (Checking on the rear screen does not compare, for me). I really love mirrorless cameras, and I love my EOS-mount lenses....it would be great to have it all together. I don't dislike my 5DIII. I just think I would prefer working with a killer FF mirrorless body with Canon functionality.