Hector Fernandez wrote:
Its not incredibly sexy as the fuji or great for the price as the sony, its just meh.

what is the price? for the two version of mirrorless cameras???

Jose Deida wrote:
NEX7 or better specs, or bust.

So, you want lots of noise at relatively low ISO's? Easy!

Digitoxin wrote:
And now the rumored specs:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/canon-eos-m-specs/

Le yawn.

Any guesses on price?

If they put this into the same category as the fuji x series (price), I don't think it will do well.  So, I think it needs to be under that.  Thoughts?

Wait? It's reckoned to just be a slim version of the 650D then? Jesus. Will they actually just stop for a couple of seconds and make a great innovation? They're just making baby steps and calling it major progress.

Robb Mann wrote:

So, you want lots of noise at relatively low ISO's? Easy!

http://tinyurl.com/c6gglvr

You mean better SNR than the sensor going into this Canon? And better on every other metric of IQ? Because that is the case here.

Sorry, I've been a very happy Canon user for a looooong time, but the fact is that their sensor technology and performance has been lagging behind their competitors for several years now.

Robb Mann wrote:
So, you want lots of noise at relatively low ISO's? Easy!

To achieve the opposite?... low noise and high ISOs... wouldn't that be the primary reason for creating zero vibration mirrorless?  Sony had you beat at this game Canon... before your camera was even introduced... AND... sensors on both those overpriced cams are still way too small... buzzz... FAIL!...

Leggy Mountbatten wrote:
It's an EF mount, so I'll bet that it will work with our lenses with a simple adapter.

The thing that makes me yawn is that it's yet another camera without a viewfinder. Hooray for shaky pictures!

Yous use a Hoodman thingy with their expensive rubber band.
(Yeah I know they would have to make one that fits)

gl-amour wrote:
The press embargo ended 10 minutes ago
http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/cano … -official/

$800 for the body and the 22mm f/2?

Add another $200 to get the EF adaptor?

For many avid photographers, this camera is DOA.  But, it may sell quite well into a mass market of suburbanites.   IDK. 

Canon has lost its ability to innovate IMO.  Sad.

Digitoxin wrote:

$800 for the body and the 22mm f/2?

Add another $200 to get the EF adaptor?

For many avid photographers, this camera is DOA.  But, it may sell quite well into a mass market of suburbanites.   IDK. 

Canon has lost its ability to innovate IMO.  Sad.

Canon and Nikon...with their mirrorless brick they produce...have lost all senses. Those prices? For real Canon? And Nikon should still be ashamed of that brick they produce with an exciting 10mp, and rather small sensor in the V1.  At least with Canon you get their old stable 18mp. A big ol LOL at Canon and Nikon....Fail.

hbutz New York wrote:
Problem with mirror-less system is temporal skew.  Each row of CCD's is read in sequence, meaning that the image is still changing as the data is being pulled off.

The focal plane shutters on DSLRs do this. And it is not a necessarily a problem with mirrorless cameras, it is a problem with certain types of CMOS sensors which can be designed out. Canon may have done this, we will just have to wait and see.

ASYLUM - Photo wrote:
Not at all sold on this. With no viewfinder or physical controls, this is clearly pointed at the consumer crowd... yet its $800. Not really sure where this fits in.

My thoughts too.  Only, it is $1,000 if you want to use your existing lenses.

I think it might be DOA but, WTF do I know about consumer market niches?  (answer: just about nothing)

Brick Wilson wrote:
Having to carry around lens and adapters defeats the purpose of a tiny point & shoot. And it's insanely expensive for the quality & features it offers. No idea who would want this.

This is the reason that bought a Canon G1 X.

Digitoxin wrote:

My thoughts too.  Only, it is $1,000 if you want to use your existing lenses.

I think it might be DOA but, WTF do I know about consumer market niches?  (answer: just about nothing)

Hey Canon...Didn't you guys learn anything from the two massive Bricks from Nikon??? These mirrorless cameras are way over priced....and Nikon has reduced the price of their over priced bricks.

Makes zero sense to me...

K E S L E R wrote:
Unless this thing has 24MP, 45 cross type AF and be able to shoot sports, I don't see it selling.  It seems to lack a lot of obvious features a small compact camera should have.

Less than 5 FPS... It's definitely not aimed at the pro.

Looks like an old design that finally made the light of day. Everyone else seems to have leapfrogged past the technological limitations of this camera.

Chuckarelei wrote:
Not only that. Try to use it on a bright sunny day. You can't see shit on the LED screen. But then of course, users are encouraged to bring along that 4x5 view camera black cloth. They are so dirt cheap now on Craigslist.

I'll bet  some company  will market a tiny  viewfinder  shade.
Meh, Honestly , I  can't  see  the usefullness of  this type of camera.
I can stay  with  a compact "bridge" camera   with a permanently   mounted zoom  lens, though it has a smaller  sensor...or better yet.. pull out my "compact"100$ P&S camera

DOUGLASFOTOS wrote:

Hey Canon...Didn't you guys learn anything from the two massive Bricks from Nikon??? These mirrorless cameras are way over priced....and Nikon has reduced the price of their over priced bricks.

Makes zero sense to me...

Massive bricks from Nikon? What are you talking about? The Nikon 1 cameras are comparatively small. I wouldn't use them, but they aren't bricks.

If you want a brick, have a look at the Pentax K-01 mirrorless - they used the full-size mount, with the consequence that the thing is quite large.

Canon seem to have followed more of the NEX path - using an APS-C size sensor and a reduced mount (EF-M) with the option of attaching an adapter and using the full-size lenses.

I'm not saying that I want one of these, though. I can imagine it appealing to someone as a lighter weight body for use mostly with the 22mm lens, with the option of using your EF lenses. Might even call it a backup

R_Marquez wrote:
I see how it's not an exciting camera, but I don't see how it's any worse than any other mirrorless camera. Is it just because it doesn't have the nostalgia factor and the look of an old camera?

I think if it had the same innards and it looked like a film camera, many more people would be praising it.

A t4i in a smaller package is attractive to me. The only thing I don't like is the new mount.

The mount drives the size decisions. Where Fuji/Sony/Olympus win is the size of the lenses. You can have a small camera with fast primes that are also small. Not with the Canon, not with the Pentax, they are both huge compared to the competition. At the same time, I like that you can mount EF lenses.

A dual mount with a small inner mount and an adapter for a larger mount to take EF would have been nice. A dedicated retractable hood for the LCD is a must-have but nobody has them.

I could give this one a miss. Now if they pack a full frame sensor in there, then it's more interesting. Add a real rangefinder from Canon's glory days making Leica copies and I would want one over many other options.

Neil Snape wrote:
I liked the Fuji until the recent Sony PnS came out. I am disappointed with Canon, this one, the 5DIII everything they've done.

If it were like in the old days when we got paid often or all the time, I would dump Canon. It ain't like that so I'm stuck for now.

Yet I'll have a Sony pocket camera for the next NY trip, without doubt producing some great images that my current Canon PnS cannot do.

what about the 5D3 disappoints you?

and have you used a G1X?

Stephen Eastwood
http://www.StephenEastwood.com

The Grand Artist wrote:
This camera is not intended for anyone here it is for average consumers. I have met many an aspiring photographer that thought any of the mirrorless options were a better choice for them because they where less complicated. This is directed squarely at the smartphone crowd and they do not want to use a viewfinder.

Most people here do not like Rebel/xxD series cameras either but Canon still sells a ton of them to people everyday. If you don't like the Rebels, then I don't understand why you would want an even smaller camera.

You guys are missing the point. It is supposed to be a P&S with changeable lens.

That or it's a good backup to throw in your bag. You can never have too many of those. Not a camera I would plan on using, but if I'm on a shoot and both of my cameras die...

Frozen Instant Imagery wrote:

Massive bricks from Nikon? What are you talking about? The Nikon 1 cameras are comparatively small. I wouldn't use them, but they aren't bricks.

If you want a brick, have a look at the Pentax K-01 mirrorless - they used the full-size mount, with the consequence that the thing is quite large.

Canon seem to have followed more of the NEX path - using an APS-C size sensor and a reduced mount (EF-M) with the option of attaching an adapter and using the full-size lenses.

I'm not saying that I want one of these, though. I can imagine it appealing to someone as a lighter weight body for use mostly with the 22mm lens, with the option of using your EF lenses. Might even call it a backup

Not in size..but bricks don't float...Nikon V1 with 10mp, undersized sensor's don't cut it in 2012!!! Plus 899 dollars...Just don't make much sense for today! Bricks.