# Canon EOS M5 Coming Before Photokina [CR3]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 1, 2016)

```
We’re told that we’re going to see the Canon EOS M5 announced before Photokina.</p>
<p>Canon EOS M5 known specifications:</p>
<ul>
<li>24.2mp (80D sensor or some variant, we’re 90% sure on this)</li>
<li>Built-in electronic viewfinder</li>
<li>A new AF system (Could be the best new feature of the EOS M line)</li>
<li>A more classical camera design, more in line with Fuji or Olympus</li>
<li>EF-M 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM coming alongside the new body</li>
<li>September 15, 2016 announcement (We’re 90% sure on this)</li>
</ul>
<p>Once we hear more, we’ll pass it on.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## KrisK (Sep 1, 2016)

Well, I already own the XC10.

And now I'm looking forward to the M5.

Call me stupid, I guess.


----------



## Jamesy (Sep 1, 2016)

I already have the M3 - if I get a M5 I could make a BMW ad 

Built-in EVF, its about time, the external one on the M3 is clunky to pull out of the bag and attach/detach.


----------



## douglaurent (Sep 1, 2016)

Horrible if this is Canon's only mirrorless system in the coming years.
They should simply release a mirrorless 5D4 version and keep the EF mount!

No new mounts, no experimental small body sizes and no small sensors please - it can't be so hard to build an answer to the Sony 7 series and add an EVF? Does Canon really want to fall more years behind when it comes to the basic camera technology of the coming decades?


----------



## jebrady03 (Sep 1, 2016)

THIS is finally decently interesting. Canon has stated numerous times that to them, SIZE is the primary advantage to mirrorless and thus, I don't expect a FF mirrorless camera from them any time soon. But I like the rumored specs I'm seeing. 80D sensor, built-in EVF, and a "classical" design... NICE!

But seriously... portrait primes, Canon. Portrait primes...


----------



## kirispupis (Sep 1, 2016)

I have to admit this is intriguing. 

For me the big differentiator would be whether it gains enough of a following for underwater housings. Having a smaller camera that I could find an economical housing for below water, while being able to accept EF lens above water - along with recent sensor improvements - would make this difficult to pass up.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 1, 2016)

Looking good. Please add a 4K option so I can do video cropping


----------



## preppyak (Sep 1, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> They should simply release a mirrorless 5D4 version and keep the EF mount!


The 6D is about as small a camera as you are gonna get with a full-frame EF mount. They could go smaller in places (like a 100D against the 750D), but, functionally it will not match the thin-ness of the A7 series. Just making it mirrorless doesnt magically make the camera smaller, EF mount has a 44mm flange, meaning the camera has to be bigger to handle a lens + sensor.

Canon would need a new mount to make their cameras match the size of the A7 series. They might be able to work around the EF-M mount, but, Im not sure that's intended for full-frame.

Reality is that Canon isnt releasing a full-frame mirrorless system that will compete with Sony anytime soon. And Sony is gonna drop an A9 soon that is gonna take the market even further from what Canon is doing.


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 1, 2016)

Must say that I am quite interested in this.

Turning out to be an exciting month and it's only the 1st!


----------



## H. Jones (Sep 1, 2016)

This went from being "slightly" upmarket and lacking much of my interest to catching a lot of my interest. Built in EVF, 80D sensor, AF sensor, and a classical design? This might very well be the mirrorless G5X that I mentioned wanting in a previous thread.


----------



## Hellish (Sep 1, 2016)

4k! 4k! 4k!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 1, 2016)

I might consider replacing my G1X MK II with one.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 1, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I might consider replacing my G1X MK II with one.


This or next rebel with MFA.


----------



## pwp (Sep 1, 2016)

Very interesting. If Canon do this properly with a meaningful feature set, they've got themselves a winner. Sensor sounds good, EVF at long last, possible DPAF...mmmmmm!

-pw


----------



## tr573 (Sep 1, 2016)

Am I the only person who isn't obsessed with bringing back 70's era ergonomics to cameras? I don't care how cool they look - they are a chore to use. Hard to hold without adding a grip, and the stiff top plate dials that I need to take the camera away from my face to use.


----------



## cellomaster27 (Sep 1, 2016)

as soon as I saw built in EVF, THIS IS AWESOME!! can't wait to see this thing! definitely hoping 4K, just so that it offers recording like other brands.


----------



## H. Jones (Sep 1, 2016)

tr573 said:


> Am I the only person who isn't obsessed with bringing back 70's era ergonomics to cameras? I don't care how cool they look - they are a chore to use. Hard to hold without adding a grip, and the stiff top plate dials that I need to take the camera away from my face to use.



I appreciate the designs but I'm strictly a shutter/aperture wheel kinda guy, so I can agree about the top dials. I'd rather have an LCD up there than manual dials. I liked the m3's implementation of the front and rear control wheels, so hopefully they keep that moving forward into this design.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 1, 2016)

Am I the only person who thinks its odd that in a little over 4 years time Canon will have released 5 iterations of the M body and only 7 lenses, six of which are quite slow?


----------



## tr573 (Sep 1, 2016)

brad-man said:


> Am I the only person who thinks its odd that in a little over 4 years time Canon will have released 5 iterations of the M body and only 7 lenses, six of which are quite slow?



They are likely throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks before they really jump in with both feet on lens development. They obviously don't see any reason to rush with this, or they wouldn't be dabbling in this way


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 1, 2016)

brad-man said:


> Am I the only person who thinks its odd that in a little over 4 years time Canon will have released 5 iterations of the M body and only 7 lenses, six of which are quite slow?



It fits their idea of what the M is. Canon believe it is a P&S market camera and regular u[grades are the norm. Most people don't buy more lenses than the kit lens anyway so why bother with more? They are all slow because Canon see the main 'advantage' of mirrorless system over a small DSLR is size, fast lenses that cover an APS-C sensor aren't small so don't fit the design brief.


----------



## weixing (Sep 1, 2016)

Hi,
G5X look alike?? 

Have a nice day.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 1, 2016)

tr573 said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > Am I the only person who thinks its odd that in a little over 4 years time Canon will have released 5 iterations of the M body and only 7 lenses, six of which are quite slow?
> ...



They are not dabbling. They are selling a lot of mirrorless cameras that sell very well in markets they are designed towards. 'We', typical CR readers, are not the target market for the M Canon believe is profitable to build.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 1, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > Am I the only person who thinks its odd that in a little over 4 years time Canon will have released 5 iterations of the M body and only 7 lenses, six of which are quite slow?
> ...



I quite agree that Canon is marketing the M series for the Rebel Jr crowd, but it was cruel of them to release the wonderful 22mm early on and not follow thru with a few more fast primes. It may not make financial sense for Canon to do so, but dammit, it's what I want. Stupid Canon.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 1, 2016)

•24.2mp (80D sensor or some variant, we’re 90% sure on this)
•Built-in electronic viewfinder
•A new AF system (Could be the best new feature of the EOS M line)
•A more classical camera design, more in line with Fuji or Olympus

These look promising. Still, it's crop 

tilting/swivel screen??? Big mistake if Canon doesn't have one.


----------



## HaroldC3 (Sep 1, 2016)

weixing said:


> Hi,
> G5X look alike??
> 
> Have a nice day.



Sounds like it. Hopefully with the fully articulating touch screen.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2016)

pwp said:


> Very interesting. If Canon do this properly with a meaningful feature set, they've got themselves a winner. Sensor sounds good, EVF at long last, possible DPAF...mmmmmm!
> 
> -pw



Integral EVF at long last indeed. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2016)

brad-man said:


> Am I the only person who thinks its odd that in a little over 4 years time Canon will have released 5 iterations of the M body and only 7 lenses, six of which are quite slow?



It's not odd at all. It's just Canon being foolish.

1) They want to keep the aggregate system (body + lens) small, and slower glass allows that.

2) If you want fast, adapt some EF glass.

I have long been beating the drums for clever sort-of-quick lenses with USM focusing in the native EF-M mount to stay relatively small.  EF-M f/2 USM primes would be awesome.

- A


----------



## Rocky (Sep 1, 2016)

Canon should have put IS into the EF-M 22/2. That will make the M a good low light camera.


----------



## TeT (Sep 1, 2016)

Hears hoping it is as usable as my 6D...


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 1, 2016)

DPAF and 4K video would certainly make this camera a great All in one solution for videographers.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2016)

Silly technical question:

Would dropping the identical 80D sensor into the EOS-M (which is effectively run in LiveView) guarantee it will employ DPAF? Any chance they could use the sensor to capture images but opt to *not* use DPAF for battery or processing cost reasons, or does using that 80D sensor effectively mandate DPAF?

(I would love DPAF, but I'm just trying to read the tea leaves here. I don't know if choosing to use the 80D sensor includes _everything it does_ on the 80D.)

- A


----------



## cellomaster27 (Sep 1, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Silly technical question:
> 
> Would dropping the identical 80D sensor into the EOS-M (which is effectively run in LiveView) guarantee it will employ DPAF? Any chance they could use the sensor to capture images but opt to *not* use DPAF for battery or processing cost reasons, or does using that 80D sensor effectively mandate DPAF?
> 
> ...



it says "80D sensor or a variant". It would be very disappointing to see the M5 not having DPAF. I mean, that's just stupid. It's a technology that Canon has had out for a couple years now.. they should implement it in every new model with pride. Not just a way to partition the various lines by including/excluding features. If they want the M5 to be popular, they need to think forward, not backwards. It'll still be popular regardless among canon fans but will it be a competition against other brands? will see~


----------



## MrFotoFool (Sep 1, 2016)

Finally a built in viewfinder! (I would rather have an optical viewfinder, but this is better than the nothing on my original M).


----------



## eosuser1234 (Sep 1, 2016)

Could this offer the new global shutter Canon has been speaking of?
If so, it would make a big impact for Canon on the upper end of the mirrorless market.


----------



## Woody (Sep 1, 2016)

With DPAF and EVF, I will be looking very hard at this camera. Otherwise...


----------



## Quackator (Sep 1, 2016)

On a German forum somebody reported that Canon Germany sales staff will be told about the new camera today. So, it is imminent any minute.

I think I'll preorder.....


----------



## Hector1970 (Sep 1, 2016)

Hopefully it is a good camera.
I'm certainly interested.
It would be great if it came with a number of fast primes.
Something like
15mm
22mm
30mm
50mm
Roughly the equivalent of 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm
I've been tempted by Fuji and Olympus as they have good primes.
Let's see what happens.


----------



## hne (Sep 1, 2016)

If it's got DPAF, proper physical controls*, and is announced with either an EF-M 53/1.2, EF-M 85/1.4 or EF-M 15-40/1.8 I'd be highly interested in getting one. Maybe even one of each. Especially if those lenses had IS.



* a rear control dial that is possible to reach one-handed would satisfy me


----------



## Fleetie (Sep 1, 2016)

hne said:


> If it's got DPAF, proper physical controls*, and is announced with either an EF-M 53/1.2, EF-M 85/1.4 ...


Ha-ha! What a comedian!


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 1, 2016)

preppyak said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > They should simply release a mirrorless 5D4 version and keep the EF mount!
> ...


Wrong.
Ef mirrorless could be the same size as an SL1


----------



## kairos (Sep 1, 2016)

Very excited. I wonder if it gets better battery?
Or even USB charging. Would love to use M5 for
timelapses on my hikes


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 1, 2016)

Sounds perfect.
I mean, they could always screw up some random feature that you don't expect to go wrong (viewfinder, battery life, some random QC issue), but barring obscure flaws this looks like a well rounded base package.

I'll probably have one sooner or later, depending on cost (and it needs DPRAW).


----------



## Deleted member 378221 (Sep 1, 2016)

This was not on my radar!

I've had the original M for a little over 3 years now. It's a capable little camera that I like to take along when I'm not too serious about photography. I only own the 22/2.0 and the 11-22/4 IS, but they do well for me. I also own the EF adapter which I have never used except for the "hahaha, this looks weird on my 300mm" effect. ;D

Now ever since DPAF was announced in the 70D (mid-2013) I wanted the tech to go into the M-Line. But since then we've seen the M2, M3 and M10, and none of these brought the AF system up to speed (pun not intendend). Now, the prospect of getting 80D-style dynamic range and AF, plus an EVF...if they don't eff this up I'll definitely get one. Just a bit scared about the price...and I just ordered the 5D4. Canon seems to be doing everything right, at least my spending habits say so. ;D

I'll be utterly excited if they have the camera available for hands-on at Photokina, I'll be there the 21st.


----------



## mustafa (Sep 1, 2016)

eosuser1234 said:


> Could this offer the new rolling shutter Canon has been speaking of?
> If so, it would make a big impact for Canon on the upper end of the mirrorless market.



I think you mean global shutter. They already have rolling shutters!


----------



## VooDooZG (Sep 1, 2016)

we just need DPAF, touch screen, tilt or swivel and nice evf, we dont need 4k so price dont go to high


----------



## asl (Sep 1, 2016)

Hellish said:


> 4k! 4k! 4k!



+1 

It all sounds good expect for the lack for 4K.


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 1, 2016)

eosuser1234 said:


> Could this offer the new global shutter Canon has been speaking of?
> If so, it would make a big impact for Canon on the upper end of the mirrorless market.



If you mean global shutter, uh, no. If we're lucky we're going to see that tech in high-end video gear. It's not stills camera tech, at least not yet, and _definitely not_ sub-$10k camera tech. And according to the rumor the M5 is going to use a 80D-like sensor. (global shutters are _sensor_ tech!)


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 1, 2016)

asl said:


> Hellish said:
> 
> 
> > 4k! 4k! 4k!
> ...



People _please_ have a healthy meeting with reality. Totally unrealistic expectations will only result in disappointments (and blaming Canon instead of your overhyped irrational expectations).


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 1, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> asl said:
> 
> 
> > Hellish said:
> ...



I do not think 4K is too much to expect, whether it will happen is something else entirely.

The Sony RX100 Mark IV came out over 1 year ago and that has 4K. In fact it is probably still the best super compact camera on the market that can fit in your trouser pocket. If Canon could compete with those specs, doing away with the horrible Sony UI, and dare I say even improving on them, then Canon would be on to a winner.

Incidentally, and off topic, there have been almost no rumours of Sony making a RX100 Mark V.


----------



## asl (Sep 1, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> asl said:
> 
> 
> > Hellish said:
> ...



Don't worry  I my self am pretty sure the M5 will not have 4K. (I would like to stick to canon gear, but realise it is not possible for what I want). Looking at the Canon line up it is unrealistic with 4K in M5. But looking the completion from other brands it is not that unrealistic that such camera could/should have had it. But it will not, I agree on that


----------



## vjlex (Sep 1, 2016)

I don't regret getting the M3; I've gotten some really great shots from it! But looking at that list of specs kinda makes me feel that I want the M5. The M3's autofocus isn't terrible, but it hasn't been great either. It's not fast and doesn't always get the focus right. The continuous shooting for me has been terrible- I barely get 1 fps, much less 4 or 5. But at the same time, I have only tried one flashcard, so maybe that's the issue. It's a great little camera though. I'm a little sad because, whereas there was little chance of there being any more firmware updates, a true successor now makes that chance virtually zero.

My interest in the M5 is piqued, but unlike last time, I won't be an early adopter (if I become an adopter at all; the 5D4 is still my top priority). If they introduce it at a significantly marked up price, then I'll probably pass. But if it comes out at close to what the M3 was introduced at, I'll give it several months and some reviews before deciding.


----------



## lw (Sep 1, 2016)

Another 4Ker here.

Much as I would like a Canon body on which to use my Canon lenses, without 4K it's a none starter.

It's an old chestnut, but for me I am not buying any more bodies that don't do 4K. I would have bought an 80D if it did. 

I am loving the 4K that comes from my Sony RX10, and I am not going back now...

Post Photokina there is going to be a huge choice of very capable 4K bodies that don't cost a fortune. One of those will get my money. Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic.

The competitive bar has been raised. There's no longer any justification for Canon to release any more non-4K bodies except in the most basic entry level ones - but of course Canon doesn't need to justify anything, it can do as it pleases. (same goes for Nikon I guess)

I am at the point now where I want to replace my 70D, and if that means dumping my entire Canon system, then so be it. 5DIV is attractive, but more than I want to spend. 

Of course, Canon might make the M5 so desirable even without 4K that I will have to eat my hat.
But somehow I doubt it will be as desirable as a Fuji XT2 for example. 
(but then Canon's lens prices are so darn desirable...)


----------



## douglaurent (Sep 1, 2016)

preppyak said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > They should simply release a mirrorless 5D4 version and keep the EF mount!
> ...



One nice thing about the A7 series is the small size, but that's something that's completely irrelevant compared to the fact to have an EVF, which means having focus peaking when doing photos with manual lenses, silent shooting, shooting video through the viewfinder, reviewing material in bright light without monitor and much more!

So the mirrorless success and convenience is NOT about size, it is because working with it is way more fun than with a DSLR! 

Of course less size would be cool, as you can carry more lenses. But a new Canon mount would mean buying new lenses (which would take years to have the Sony lineup) or using an adapter (which makes the whole body+lens combi as large as with a DSLR anyway).

So PLEASE Canon do the obvious and find a way to release a 5D4 with EVF and articulating screen as well, working without is a pain and not suitable for the years 2016-2020!!!
It


----------



## infared (Sep 1, 2016)

Canon....Mirroless....LMAOROTF!!!!! 
What else is there to say.


----------



## WorkonSunday (Sep 1, 2016)

as a m3 owner, i really want to see the m5 with full size EF lens AF as fast as A6300 with EF lens..... i really cant see it being that hard!


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 1, 2016)

asl said:


> Hellish said:
> 
> 
> > 4k! 4k! 4k!
> ...



I'm going to have to be a naysayer and say that 4K would overcomplicate things. Just give me solid HD recording. Heck, 99% of the stuff I watch online is at or near the lowest quality I can get. If I made a video I probably wouldn't even upload Full HD just for the sake of bandwidth.


----------



## -1 (Sep 1, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> Canon EOS M5 known specifications:
> 24.2mp (80D sensor or some variant, we’re 90% sure on this).
> Built-in electronic viewfinder
> A new AF system (Could be the best new feature of the EOS M line)
> A more classical camera design, more in line with Fuji or Olympus



This could be interesting, I started to wonder about with what to replace my M1 with ones it fails. Not that it shows any signs of that yeat. Got a nice thirdparty OVF, so I'm good for now, but no EVF would definately make the M5 a hard sell... What I actually is most interested in now is the DR.


----------



## lw (Sep 1, 2016)

9VIII said:


> I'm going to have to be a naysayer and say that 4K would overcomplicate things. Just give me solid HD recording. Heck, 99% of the stuff I watch online is at or near the lowest quality I can get. If I made a video I probably wouldn't even upload Full HD just for the sake of bandwidth.



But having 4K doesn't stop you using it in only HD....
Whereas having only HD does prevent me using it in 4K


----------



## douglaurent (Sep 1, 2016)

Somehow it's still unbelievable that Canon continues to release cameras that are limited to 2 (TWO) megapixel video and wants consumers to shoot with that in the year 2017. If they had no competition in the past, we probably would be stuck with 6 megapixel photo resolution.


----------



## 1Zach1 (Sep 1, 2016)

I'll be very interested if the size isn't greatly increased. Still rocking an M1 that I love due to it's size.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Somehow it's still unbelievable that Canon continues to release cameras that are limited to 2 (TWO) megapixel video and wants consumers to shoot with that in the year 2017.



About as unbelievable as the fact that Canon continues to be the ILC market leader, and in 2016 their market share is growing. How the &$#*^% is it even _possible_ that Canon understands the market better than you??


----------



## ggweci (Sep 1, 2016)

Excited to see what this brings. 

I am currently thinking of making the switch to mirrorless ILC and having it complement my FF Canon. Fuji is at the top of the list of me right now, as I have an X100S that I really like (minus the AF speed, which as been corrected in more current models). Also really like their selection of lenses.

But, if Canon goes serious with the M5 and the specs hint to that, it will be something for me to seriously consider. Especially since I've read great things about the 22mm and 11-22mm lenses. They just need to add a nice portrait length lense (50mm f2 at least) and it would cover most of my requirements for a compact system.

Also, the AF speed needs to be up there with the likes of Fuji at least, but would prefer Sony/Panasonic speed ideally.


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 1, 2016)

Dylan777 said:


> •24.2mp (80D sensor or some variant, we’re 90% sure on this)
> •Built-in electronic viewfinder
> •A new AF system (Could be the best new feature of the EOS M line)
> •A more classical camera design, more in line with Fuji or Olympus
> ...



Your bullet points are spot on. It would appear Canon is finally releasing something that will compete with the market leaders.

I'd add "crop" as a plus as well. A crop sensor seems to hit the sweet spot for mirrorless, big enough sensor to capture some real light and make a great picture while keeping the system (especially lenses) small and compact. Once we start talking A7 body/lens, well, I'll just shoot my 6D at that size point.

tilty screen, I'll personally pass but wouldn't cry if it had one.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Sep 1, 2016)

...I know I'm not the only poster here who values the size (small) and weight (light) of the M and M2--and for those of you who don't know the M2 is slightly smaller and slightly lighter than the original M.

So...after two weeks traveling throughout New England and the Province of Quebec...and getting some use out of a trio of L lenses mated to a 5DMkIII but more from the M2/11-22mm combination (and a bit from an S95)...*I will be looking VERY carefully at the effect of an EVF on the size and weight of the upcoming new M.*

The primary use of my Canon gear is for family, around-the-house photos, concert and vacation photos. For these uses (with some exceptions having to do with low-light situations), size-and-weight are of paramount import.

Bang-for-the-buck? The M2/11-22mm combo.

I do look forward to seeing the focus improvements in the new M.

Thanks for reading.


----------



## lw (Sep 1, 2016)

thetechhimself said:


> The 22 and 11-22 are that good. The 22 alone is a "switcher" lens, IE an optic good enough to hook folk into the system. Ditto for the 11-22.



We all have different careabouts.
the 22mm was my least used lens. Niether wide enough nor long enough, and no IS for low-light shots. Sold it before I eventually sold the rest of my M kit. 

The 22mm by itself certainly wouldn't hook me into the M system again.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2016)

josephandrews222 said:


> ...I know I'm not the only poster here who values the size (small) and weight (light) of the M and M2--and for those of you who don't know the M2 is slightly smaller and slightly lighter than the original M.
> 
> So...after two weeks traveling throughout New England and the Province of Quebec...and getting some use out of a trio of L lenses mated to a 5DMkIII but more from the M2/11-22mm combination (and a bit from an S95)...*I will be looking VERY carefully at the effect of an EVF on the size and weight of the upcoming new M.*



Same here.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> josephandrews222 said:
> 
> 
> > ...I know I'm not the only poster here who values the size (small) and weight (light) of the M and M2--and for those of you who don't know the M2 is slightly smaller and slightly lighter than the original M.
> ...



For EOS-M, agree. Keep it small.

For EOS-M-FF (or whatever we want to call it), don't fool around: chunky 5D grip 100% -- better for more room for bigger batteries and better to hold the f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 zooms we know people will bolt on to those rigs. 

But on the FF mirroress mount, I am lost. I'm still violently undecided on Canon's biggest decision: go with a new fourth mount to keep things small vs. going full/native EF to not have to buy new lenses or mess with adaptors. 

- A


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 1, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> asl said:
> 
> 
> > Hellish said:
> ...



Just to clarify- in 2016 the expectation of 4K in a mirrorless camera is not unrealistic, only unrealistic to expect _from Canon._ They are the ones not delivering on our realistic expectations


----------



## lw (Sep 1, 2016)

I don't care how big the M5 is - it can be as big as a DSLR for all I care, and would be nicer to hold if it was.
If you want small- then carry on using the M3/10 - they are not going to disappear.

What I want the M5 for is to banish the PITA that is MAF. I just want to attach a lens, any lens, (especially hired ones) and not have to go through the pain of MAFing it to get the best performance. Some lenses like my Sigma 150-600mm are truly awful to MAF (16 different MAF points) to the point I am thinking of ditching it...

Would love an M5 that allows me to happily hand hold my 70-200 F2.8 and 150-600mm with it, as I can with a DSLR.

I also happen to like EVFs (shock horror). Because I can review images without putting my reading glasses on.

(though other features will probably make the M5 unattractive to me no doubt)


----------



## JPAZ (Sep 1, 2016)

Timing is everything!

My M1 sits in a bag virtually not being used. Got it when that "$199" special liquidation deal was active. Despite pretty good EQ, it has all the issues that have been very well discussed in these forums and frustrates me when I take it out for something. I am about to embark on a big trip and want an smaller and lighter extra camera body to bring along with the 5Diii and a kit. The M1 is an option but.........

After steadfastly refusing to get another "M" the recent deal on an M3 with an EVF sat in my gut stewing. An APS-C with 24 mP and an EVF in a small body seemed to fit the need. I already have the EF-M 22, the EF-M 18-55, and an EF-M to EF Adapter that is pretty sweet with the 40 mm f/2.8 pancake attached.

I purchased an M3 with EVF on August 28 and the day the box arrives from B&H, the CR announcement of an M5 shows up! Oh well, the new-to-be-announced camera won't be here in time for this trip so I can live with this. BTW, compared to the M1, the M3 is a dramatic improvement. It is small and light enough that I'll use it as a backup body, for some non-moving subject stills and maybe some video.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 1, 2016)

I wonder....what *AvTvM* thinks about M5 rumor specs


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2016)

Dylan777 said:


> I wonder....what *AvTvM* thinks about M5 rumor specs


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 1, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > •24.2mp (80D sensor or some variant, we’re 90% sure on this)
> ...



Either crop or FF mirrorless, I think if we attach proper native lens to it weight and size is not much different. 

For a7, FE 28mm f2, FE 35 f2.8, FE 55mm f1.8 are great choices as compact. Bigger f1.4 primes and f2.8 zooms are great options when needed.

Fuji has great selection of primes, once we reach to f1.4 areas we not really save much. Again, it's a great option to have.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 1, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder....what *AvTvM* thinks about M5 rumor specs



LOL....CR will be more peaceful place with this rumor.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2016)

Dylan777 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



I dunno, his EF-M 80mm f/2 IS in a pancake footprint that (obviously) millions of people want has not yet been rumored. _That_ is the great AvTvM peacemaker, and I'm sure Canon is hard at work on it. ;D

- A


----------



## 1kind (Sep 1, 2016)

I say DPAF, won't have 4k, tilt touch screen. With the EVF, it won't be able to tilt up like the G1X Mark II.

I think it will be a marriage of the G5X and 80D


----------



## noncho (Sep 1, 2016)

brad-man said:


> Am I the only person who thinks its odd that in a little over 4 years time Canon will have released 5 iterations of the M body and only 7 lenses, six of which are quite slow?



Same for me. It's a shame that there are no more small bright primes like 22/2. Canon says NO to the enthusiast market with more zoom lenses like 18-150.


----------



## Ditboy (Sep 1, 2016)

"A more classical camera design, more in line with Fuji or Olympus" -does this mean classical like the Pro-2 and Pen-F?
When the G5 first came out I immediately thought that would be the way the M line would go. Doesn't matter, I'm comfortable with either form factor.
Sure hope it has DPAF, couple more fps, 1/8000, iso 16,000...basically the specs of the 80D would be really nice!


----------



## lw (Sep 1, 2016)

noncho said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > Am I the only person who thinks its odd that in a little over 4 years time Canon will have released 5 iterations of the M body and only 7 lenses, six of which are quite slow?
> ...



And in all the years of APS-C how many EF-S primes have they released?

As far as Canon are concerned fast = EF and that is why there is an adaptor.

They aren't about to start making primes in multiple mounts. No manufacturer does.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 1, 2016)

lw said:


> And in all the years of APS-C how many EF-S primes have they released?



Yep. The only primes made today by Canon in EF-S are the 24mm pancake and the 60mm macro (if memory serves).

Some of us (myself included) are saying that is a dumb position for Canon to hold. Expecting big pickle jar f/1.4 EF-M primes isn't going to happen, but a plurality of right-sized f/2 EF-M primes (hopefully with USM of some sort) would do wonders to attracting bigger dollar spenders to the brand.

An _FF mirrorless offering_, however, would be death sentence for fast primes for EOS M. All the bigger spenders would get that rig instead and EOS M would effectively become a mirrorless rebel, left to rot with plastic kit nastiness while the FF mount gets all the good stuff.

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 1, 2016)

A useless camera when combined with the ef-m set of lenses. 

It's going to be a ton bigger (in the realm of a x-e2) which immediately loses the charm of the m system.

All the lenses are small, slow and compact.

I would not be surprised if the af is tuned more for the ef-m to ef adapter, versus native ef-m lenses.

With the way the m eco system currently is, this camera unless it is followed with 3+ fast lenses, fits into the ecosystem like teets on a bull.


----------



## Ditboy (Sep 1, 2016)

It would be nice if Canon would make some fast primes, but with the continuing commitment to the M line, 3rd party lens makers will keep adding EF-M mounts. I am half way to having an entire Rokinon line of fast primes now. I was waiting for the M5 to decide whether or not to add the 21 1.4 & 50 1.2. Just bought the Mikanon Speedmaster 35 0.95 and really like it! I shot 20+ yrs manual focus, so with peaking, it's a breeze.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 1, 2016)

Ditboy said:


> It would be nice if Canon would make some fast primes, but with the continuing commitment to the M line, 3rd party lens makers will keep adding EF-M mounts. I am half way to having an entire Rokinon line of fast primes now. I was waiting for the M5 to decide whether or not to add the 21 1.4 & 50 1.2. Just bought the Mikanon Speedmaster 35 0.95 and really like it! I shot 20+ yrs manual focus, so with peaking, it's a breeze.



Beats me why canon doesn't toss a few bucks at sigma.

And then license the speed booster patents, and bundle in ef and fd adapters in a ae-1 styled body to keep avtvm happy.


----------



## Ditboy (Sep 1, 2016)

MrFotoFool said:


> Finally a built in viewfinder! (I would rather have an optical viewfinder, but this is better than the nothing on my original M).


After using the M & M3 (with external EVF) alongside of my various DSLRs (6D, 7Dmk2,70d) I really don't like optical anymore. I shoot a lot in low light and there are times I have to stop using the DSLR even with fast glass because it was either too dark to see or to dark for the cameras to focus. If they give the M5 the horsepower it needs to retain live view during shooting (a63000 & XT-2) I'll be happy to say good bye to optical finders forever. (OK, maybe optical for sports)


----------



## Ditboy (Sep 1, 2016)

asl said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > asl said:
> ...



4K not what I want in a still camera. Call me an old fart, but I could care less about 4K. If it has it fine, but it sure won't be a deal breaker. I would guess if it does have 4K, that means it would have to have some horsepower under the hood for the the things I do want, like continuos live view during shooting.


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 1, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > douglaurent said:
> ...



Yeah, but it wouldn't balance well with hardly any lenses. Even a 35 f/1.4 would be awkward, let alone a proper zoom. Might be fun with the 40mm pancake, but that would be about it.


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 1, 2016)

Dylan777 said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



I think we're on the same page, I don't necessary disagree with your points, except maybe on the Fuji primes. Even their "large" f/1.4 primes are much smaller then say Canon f/1.4 primes. A prime example (sorry, couldn't resist) would be the Fuji XF 23mm f/1.4 vs a Canon/Sigma EF 35mm f/1.4. Completely night and day in size and weight.

With that said, I'm looking forward to the new Fuji XF 23mm f/2. I have the XF 35mm f/2 and the new focus mechanism is so silent/fast. Of course optics is top notch as well. I've embraced the mirrorless as my compact system and gone the f/2 prime route. If I want big bokeh, narrow DOF, that's where I pull out the FF Canon gear.


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 1, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Expecting big pickle jar f/1.4 EF-M primes isn't going to happen, but a plurality of right-sized f/2 EF-M primes (hopefully with USM of some sort) would do wonders to attracting bigger dollar spenders to the brand.



Agree 100%. 

Like a lot of folks, I'm a pretty big fan of the 22mm pancake. Since I use it on the original M, the camera I'm sure is the limiting factor in regards to focus speed. However, being that it uses that slower STM that seems to be shared on the EF-S 24mm and EF 40mm pancakes, I can see where the little 22mm could be frustrating at times when faster focus speed is desired and it's paired with a fast focusing camera (aka 80D DPAF sensor).

EF-M (from an enthusiast point of view) really could use some fast aperture (f/2 good enough), fast focusing primes.


----------



## Ditboy (Sep 1, 2016)

Lenses on my want list, depending on what the actual M5 has, is the Canon FD 400 f4.5 or 500 f4.5L. The 400 can be picked up for around $300-$400, the 500 for $1,200. I had them both back in the day and they were excellent optics, especially the 500 (next to the 300 2.8, the sharpest Canon lens I have ever used). With a $25 converter and focus peaking and 1.6x factor, these would be awesome combos!


----------



## zim (Sep 1, 2016)

Scaled up G5X please, just make it big enough all round to house an apsc sensor and take ef(s) lenses. That's what I've been hoping for ever since the release of the G5X and having played with that camera the only thing I disliked about it was that it was absolutely tiny, just couldn't handle it.


----------



## lw (Sep 1, 2016)

Ditboy said:


> 4K not what I want in a still camera. Call me an old fart, but I could care less about 4K.



There is no such thing as a "still camera" these days. Proving indeed you are an old fart 

I want cameras that are equally adept at both. And for the same reason you no doubt seek higher and higher quality stills then I also seek higher and higher quality movies (as well as stills). For me, HD no longer delivers that and now there are endless alternatives to the M that do then Canon needs to get its act together to retain me as a user


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 1, 2016)

zim said:


> Scaled up G5X please, just make it big enough all round to house an apsc sensor and take ef(s) lenses. That's what I've been hoping for ever since the release of the G5X and having played with that camera the only thing I disliked about it was that it was absolutely tiny, just couldn't handle it.


+1, kind of. The G5X is too small for me to handle comfortably like an DSLR and too large to fit in my pockets. That's why I bought the G7X instead and waited for something like this camera. An X-T1 sized body would be perfect. My hope is that, along with the M5 body, Canon will introduce something like a Metabones Speed Booster, only 4/3 f-stops. I would, however, accept a 1 stop booster and fully realize that booster plus a 35 f/1.4 lens might be a bit unbalanced on a small body.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 1, 2016)

They're gonna put an EVF in this thing and make it bigger?

That's not what I personally want.

So, me and billions of other people won't buy this camera. 

Stupid Canon.  :  8)


----------



## Act444 (Sep 1, 2016)

Honestly, the time has come for DPAF to make its way into the M series...


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 1, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> ...
> I would not be surprised if the af is tuned more for the ef-m to ef adapter, versus native ef-m lenses.
> ...



Hopefully.
The best application I can think of for an ultra compact body is to stick it on the back of a supertelephoto lens.

Large lenses are only bulky in one direction, I can easily stick the lens+body into a pouch or strap it to a pack as long as the camera body doesn't significantly protrude outside the width of the lens itself.

Compact bodies are just as beneficial on large lenses as anywhere else.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Sep 1, 2016)

9VIII said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Uhhhhhh... No.


----------



## bholliman (Sep 1, 2016)

9VIII said:


> Compact bodies are just as beneficial on large lenses as anywhere else.



Not for me. I want a body large enough to balance with the long lens and comfortable to hold. A larger body has controls I can operate without looking while my eye is behind the view finder.

Small mirrorless bodies are nice with small lenses. Large bodies are practically required (for me) with large lenses.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 1, 2016)

"classical design"... fugly G5X ... oh NOOOOO! I hate it. Would have liked adapted M3 design just with pop-up EVF in top left corner.


----------



## zim (Sep 2, 2016)

They're not gonna put an EVF in this thing and make it bigger?

That's not what I personally want.

So, me and trillions of other people won't buy this camera. 

Stupidur Canon.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 2, 2016)

zim said:


> They're not gonna put an EVF in this thing and make it bigger?
> 
> That's not what I personally want.
> 
> ...



u dont want a built in EVF? Go and f*cking buy M, M2, M10 or M3 and sh*t up.


----------



## SpartanII (Sep 2, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > They're not gonna put an EVF in this thing and make it bigger?
> ...



I think he was joking.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2016)

SpartanII said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > zim said:
> ...



Maybe AvTvM is a joke. 

Wait, was that the semantically correct? Oh, well...its f*cking close enough.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 2, 2016)

stupid Canon and their stupid M's are a joke. A bad joke.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> stupid Canon and their stupid M's are a joke. A bad joke.



Yep, late to the party, only one line of MILCs, and now #3 in their market. Canon HQ is laughing at that joke all the way to the bank... Since they're doing so partly with _your_ money that _you_ spent on Canon mirrorless gear, that makes you part of the butt of that joke. Maybe that's what makes it a bad joke?


----------



## pokerz (Sep 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > stupid Canon and their stupid M's are a joke. A bad joke.
> ...



Canon succeeded in gaining entry MILC market by cut-throat pricing ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2016)

pokerz said:


> Canon succeeded in gaining entry MILC market by cut-throat pricing ;D



In Japan? They hit #3 for 2015, were the M10 and M3 'cut-throat priced' in Japan?


----------



## Quackator (Sep 2, 2016)

pokerz said:


> Canon succeeded in gaining entry MILC market by cut-throat pricing ;D



And I bet they are still making money on this.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 2, 2016)

Quackator said:


> pokerz said:
> 
> 
> > Canon succeeded in gaining entry MILC market by cut-throat pricing ;D
> ...



possible. And I still don't buy M2, M10, M3. 8)
And if M5 really comes in retro, Fuji/Oly, "Mini-DSLR", super-fugly G5X type styling and size (!), i may also pass up on that one.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > stupid Canon and their stupid M's are a joke. A bad joke.
> ...



Thom has them as #3 in global mirrorless last year, and #2 globally this year.


Maybe the biggest joke is the importance some place in mirrorless.


----------



## freezehead (Sep 2, 2016)

wll, i guess the price will be premium as hell too, not less than 1200$ for the body. So, will wait a long time to upgrade from my eos-M toy


----------



## lw (Sep 2, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Yep, late to the party, only one line of MILCs, and now #3 in their market. Canon HQ is laughing at that joke all the way to the bank... Since they're doing so partly with _your_ money that _you_ spent on Canon mirrorless gear, that makes you part of the butt of that joke. Maybe that's what makes it a bad joke?
> ...



But this doesn't make the M a great camera. It isn't #2 or 3 because it is the 2nd or 3rd best MILC.

Canon know how to make and sell cameras to sheep. The M is a camera for sheep. There are lots of sheep.

Whereas for wolves, Canon make DSLRs.

Hopefully, the M5 might be good enough for shepards


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 2, 2016)

lw said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



I tend to agree on both points.

1) Yeah, great so the M line is the Toyota Camry of mirrorless, fine for the masses but underwhelming for an enthusiast.

2) The M5 does look like the one that will finally have some appeal to us forum members.


----------



## zim (Sep 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> SpartanII said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



;D ;D ;D Thanks SpartanII, It was a jest to Neuro's comment I guess my aim was bad but f*cking close enough.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 2, 2016)

btw.: why would/should Canon announce their [hopefully!] first worthwhile mirrorless ILC body ever BEFORE rather than at photokina? It would not take away anything from 5D IV announcement [which was leaked some weeks ahead already]. They'd have 2 headline product announcements: 1 fairly boring re. latest iteration of their mid-level bread-and-butter FF mirrorslapper plus 1 reasonably exciting APS-C mirrorless cam ... ?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2016)

lw said:


> But this doesn't make the M a great camera. It isn't #2 or 3 because it is the 2nd or 3rd best MILC.
> 
> Canon know how to make and sell cameras to sheep. The M is a camera for sheep. There are lots of sheep.
> 
> ...



If you also consider that Canon makes Rebel/xxxD dSLRs for other sheep, and high-end dSLRs for wolves, your analogy is very apt. There are a billion sheep in the world, and there are a few hundred thousand wolves. There are far few shepards in the world, which is why Canon doesn't see much of a market there.


----------



## crashpc (Sep 2, 2016)

All good points. The reason is obvious. When you hunger all protecting shepards, they die, wolves eat sheep and there is no low-end, moneymaking market left. You need to handle those few shepards too, and of course at seemingly high cost.


----------



## lw (Sep 2, 2016)

And most of us in here are hungry like a wolf. We ain't sheep 

But I guess I could settle for a Sheperds Crop Crook


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2016)

There will always be sheep. The trick is finding out what the sheep want to eat, then offering it to them. Canon has done that very well, and despite the doomsaying keyboard experts, they will likely continue to do so.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 2, 2016)

Come on Guys, it's Shepherd. How are the sheeps supposed to now how's in charge if its spelt rong ?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 2, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> Come on Guys, it's Shepherd. How are the sheeps supposed to now how's in charge if its spelt rong ?



Wait, I thought we were talking about the guy who flew the Mercury mission and walked on the moon.


----------



## crashpc (Sep 2, 2016)

Even hungry shepard can eat sheep


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 2, 2016)

Neuro, you bonehead. We're talking about Commander Shepard of the Normandy.

#doi

- A


----------



## JamesD (Sep 2, 2016)

New here and I will be new to Canon Cameras soon. I have been shopping and researching the M03 for a few weeks but I am now going to hold out and see what the M05 offers. I am looking for a light field type/walk around camera and so far of the C Sensor cameras the M03 checks most of the boxes.

The Sony, a6000 and a6300, despite all its hype has a very limited lens choice. If the M05 can somewhat match it price wise and performance wise, I think it will blow it out of the water with all the great lens choices Canon has. I can't wait to see this camera!


----------



## lw (Sep 2, 2016)

JamesD said:


> New here and I will be new to Canon Cameras soon. I have been shopping and researching the M03 for a few weeks but I am now going to hold out and see what the M05 offers. I am looking for a light field type/walk around camera and so far of the C Sensor cameras the M03 checks most of the boxes.
> 
> The Sony, a6000 and a6300, despite all its hype has a very limited lens choice. If the M05 can somewhat match it price wise and performance wise, I think it will blow it out of the water with all the great lens choices Canon has. I can't wait to see this camera!



Every Canon lens would work as well on the Sony's as they do on the M3


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 2, 2016)

bholliman said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Compact bodies are just as beneficial on large lenses as anywhere else.
> ...



Put a large foot on the 400f5.6 and it balances perfectly in one hand, using the same grip to shoot as you use to carry the lens by your side.
IF you have a light body. The 5D2 effectively weighs twice as much as a small Rebel (1100D, 495 grams. 5D2, 905 grams), I only took the 5D2 hiking once or twice and didn't really see the point of adding the bulk for a such a minor upgrade (the center point on the worst AF system Canon uses can still track birds quite well).
In that scenario access to controls isn't much help anyway when you're just spinning in a circles for the a half second chance at catching an animal in frame.

Of course sitting in the bleachers with a larger lens on a monopod would be different, if the lens is too front heavy to balance on its tripod foot then that would necessitate putting more weight on the back.



josephandrews222 said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



Ideally Canon would make a camera body the size of the mount itself.
The "Puck" camera is the future of photography.

You could still have two or three wheel rings going around the entire body for controls, it actually sounds much more convenient.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 2, 2016)

9VIII said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...



You must use your camera + big lens very differently to what I'm used to. That's fine, we're all different. But all I can say is, a tiny camera (especially a 'puck' as you call it) would be no good at all for my purposes.


----------



## JamesD (Sep 2, 2016)

lw said:


> JamesD said:
> 
> 
> > New here and I will be new to Canon Cameras soon. I have been shopping and researching the M03 for a few weeks but I am now going to hold out and see what the M05 offers. I am looking for a light field type/walk around camera and so far of the C Sensor cameras the M03 checks most of the boxes.
> ...


That is a valid point but now lets compare price points from B&H Photo.

Sony a6000 body only 548.00
Sony a6300 body only 998.00
Canon M3 body only 448.00

With the M3 I have to buy a viewfinder and with the two Sony's I have to buy an adapter to get started. I like what I have seen of the Canons picture quality. I have had them both in my hands. The M3's look and feel is exactly what I am looking for. My style of shooting is outdoors 90% of the time and my subjects are clouds, water, people, and animals. 

I would be willing to spend the 1000.00 for an M5 that performed on par with the a6300. But if my options are the M3 to get that feel and look vs the a6000, I have already decided on the M3. As an aside, I have never owned a Sony or Canon. I have and in the past owned cameras from Pentax, Panasonic, and Minolta digital and film back when they were in business. 

The Canon M3 impressed me as feeling like an old school film camera. I really like that about it and yes I have a little age going on at 58  I really want another major company to give Sony a mirror-less run. Competition feeds quality and price. The M3 is I think a good start for Canon. 

If the M5 is out soon enough and is a better camera for speed and picture quality, I will get it; otherwise the M3 will be my next camera.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 2, 2016)

JamesD said:


> lw said:
> 
> 
> > JamesD said:
> ...



Welcome to CR. At B&H, the M3 + EVF is currently $469. To get this deal, click on the green "build bundle" button beneath the "add to cart" button.


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 2, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> 2 headline product announcements: 1 fairly boring re. latest iteration of their mid-level bread-and-butter FF mirrorslapper plus 1 reasonably exciting APS-C mirrorless cam ... ?



I have a bad feeling I might regret responding.... but you know some people might see the 5D4 as the *exciting* announcement and the latest M as the *boring* one.


----------



## JamesD (Sep 2, 2016)

brad-man said:


> JamesD said:
> 
> 
> > lw said:
> ...


Thanks for that! Now I am seriously torn. I believe in spending more on lenses than cameras and you just made waiting for a look at the M5 a whole lot tougher.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 3, 2016)

lw said:


> Canon know how to make and sell cameras to sheep. The M is a camera for sheep. There are lots of sheep.
> 
> Whereas for wolves, Canon make DSLRs.
> 
> Hopefully, the M5 might be good enough for shepards



no, you almost got it right.. 

Canon know how to make and sell cameras. Period.


----------



## JamesD (Sep 3, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> lw said:
> 
> 
> > Canon know how to make and sell cameras to sheep. The M is a camera for sheep. There are lots of sheep.
> ...


Exactly! All the major companies make decent cameras. I don't see anything wrong with a small format camera that takes great pictures. Shoot what you like shooting and enjoy what you have in your hands! And if you cannot afford to buy good glass for a camera, get a cheaper camera and buy better glass.

I really don't know about all this sheep, shepherds, and wolves talk, but I still have an old Koni Omega Medium Format Camera a mule would be proud to carry on his back. Its way to much for me to lug around these days; but it is still a nice conversation piece


----------



## ggweci (Sep 3, 2016)

JamesD said:


> lw said:
> 
> 
> > JamesD said:
> ...



James, Sony actually has a greater lens selection for the E mount than Canon had for the M mount.

You can use EF lenses on either camera, but BOTH will require an adapter.

Also, if you like the old school feel, check out Fuji. They have an excellent camera and lens lineup with their X series.


----------



## JamesD (Sep 3, 2016)

ggweci said:


> JamesD said:
> 
> 
> > lw said:
> ...


Until I heard about the M5, my choices really came down to the M3 or the a6000. I know how to get decent results from any C Sensor camera; but I am not willing to trade down in sensor size from a C, or megapixels. I like the look of the M3; I think I can get good enough results with it, so long as I invest in the lenses. 

As far as lenses go for the Sony's, I need image stabilization at all focal lengths. My hands are not steady like they were. A lot of the Sony made lenses, especially at the shorter lengths, do not have stabilization built in. So yes I can buy the adapters for the Canon Lenses* but I do not like the feel of the a6000.
*
I have looked at the Fuji. The XT2 is the only one I would consider and its price point is way up there. 16 Megs in the other Fuji series was impressive five or more years ago. The reason I am so excited about the Canon is what you get for the money and it has that Fuji old school look. Here is what I am looking for out of the M5. similar performance and feel to a Fuji XT2 but at 400.00 or more dollars left over to spend on lenses.

But I am still, so far waiting, another two weeks for the M5. I can wait as I am not without a decent camera. I have a Pentax K3 II I bought about this time last year. It weighs about 28 ounces without battery or lens and I think it is to bulky. But it is a great all around camera.


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 3, 2016)

JamesD said:


> I have looked at the Fuji. The XT2 is the only one I would consider and its price point is way up there. 16 Megs in the other Fuji series was impressive five or more years ago. The reason I am so excited about the Sony is what you get for the money and it has that Fuji old school look. Here is what I am looking for out of the M5. similar performance and feel to a Fuji XT2 but at 400.00 or more dollars left over to spend on lenses.



Well if you're trying to be a bit budget conscience, or at least get the best bang for your buck, another knock against the Fuji X system is the cost of their lenses. Of course some of that is changing a bit with their recent 35mm f/2 at $400. And the new 23mm f/2 that should be out this month is reasonably priced as well.

It's too bad you have a hangup on the 16 MP as you can get an X-T10 or X-E2(s) for $5xx. I thoroughly enjoy my Canon gear, but I really feel for a compact/travel mirrorless system the Fuji system is the one to get.


----------



## JamesD (Sep 3, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> JamesD said:
> 
> 
> > I have looked at the Fuji. The XT2 is the only one I would consider and its price point is way up there. 16 Megs in the other Fuji series was impressive five or more years ago. The reason I am so excited about the Sony is what you get for the money and it has that Fuji old school look. Here is what I am looking for out of the M5. similar performance and feel to a Fuji XT2 but at 400.00 or more dollars left over to spend on lenses.
> ...



This is going to be my one and only all around camera once I decide between the M3 or M5. To give you an idea, the 1st two lenses I am buying will be the the Canon 11-22 and the Tamron 24-70. One super Zoom after that and I will be selling my Pentax gear. I have already given away everything else but will be keeping the old Koni Omega as it makes for a great bookend and better than that it is still fully functioning!


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 3, 2016)

ggweci said:


> JamesD said:
> 
> 
> > lw said:
> ...


Problem with Sony corp E mount is lens prices. You can buy M3 with 2-3 better quality lenses for the price of Sony 10-18mm. One of the reason I did go with Canon crop is cheap quality glass. So far it is also case with EF-M lens albeit with limited lens selection. Sony crop common walk around lens is 16-70F4 which goes for $700. I bought Sigma 17-50 f2.8 for far less. Sony has nice primes for low light 35mm and 50mm 1.8. Sony doesn't even bother to upgrade kit lens to go with such a promising a6300 release.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 3, 2016)

brad-man said:


> JamesD said:
> 
> 
> > lw said:
> ...


Man, that is very nice price. May be I should switch to M3 from 70d setup for my occasional use.


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 3, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > JamesD said:
> ...



If you can wait two weeks, the m3 might be even cheaper after the m5 is released.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 3, 2016)

aa_angus said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > brad-man said:
> ...


I will wait for few more weeks and see. What do you think, i am going to miss if I switch to M3 except 7 FPS. Does it have on board flash commander to fire 3rd party flashes. I really liked pics coming out of M3 in Dustin and IR reviews.


----------



## JamesD (Sep 3, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> aa_angus said:
> 
> 
> > ritholtz said:
> ...


The field test at IR were full of very good pictures and what I liked is the shortcomings with burst rate, video etc were not hidden nor were they beat to death. They are real but so is the fact that the M3 takes outstanding pictures at its price point; and when you add in the controls/features, lens choices, and almost range finder like feel of this camera it is in my opinion a great bargain. 

There is one major thing about me that differs from a lot of people using cameras today, I don't care one iota about video performance. In fact, if that feature makes the camera less range finder size, take it out completely as far as I am concerned.

M3 or M5, that is my question for September.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 3, 2016)

scyrene said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Ideally Canon would make a camera body the size of the mount itself.
> ...



I assume that most people grip the focusing ring while shooting with large lenses instead of keeping your left hand on the tripod foot 100% of the time.


----------



## lw (Sep 3, 2016)

JamesD said:


> I would be willing to spend the 1000.00 for an M5 that performed on par with the a6300. But if my options are the M3 to get that feel and look vs the a6000, I have already decided on the M3. As an aside, I have never owned a Sony or Canon. I have and in the past owned cameras from Pentax, Panasonic, and Minolta digital and film back when they were in business.
> 
> The Canon M3 impressed me as feeling like an old school film camera. I really like that about it and yes I have a little age going on at 58  I really want another major company to give Sony a mirror-less run. Competition feeds quality and price. The M3 is I think a good start for Canon.
> 
> If the M5 is out soon enough and is a better camera for speed and picture quality, I will get it; otherwise the M3 will be my next camera.



My point was that the M3 wasn't particularly adept with Canon's own EF lenses. (see all the various reports from users)

No one knows yet whether the M5 will be any better. So if you are buying an M because of the fantastic Canon lens choice, then it may not be the ideal match you hope it will be...

Of course it may be much better. Hopefully Canon took that point on board and improved things like the AF for EF lenses. But we just don't know. Many folks high hopes for the M3 were dashed (mine certainly were)


----------



## pokerz (Sep 3, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> ggweci said:
> 
> 
> > JamesD said:
> ...


In Canon Eosm, we have 1855 and EF-M 15-45 mm F3.5 - 6.3, does Canon bother to grade them ? :-\

Neither sigma HSM nor USM len work well in eosm (Hybrid AF), since they were designed for PDAF.

Lastly, Panasonic, OM, Fuji and Sony lens make premium mirrorless lens, Canon makes _____ lens.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 3, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> ... Canon know how to make and sell cameras. Period.



Yes, but only to some point. 

1. Canon could easily make so much BETTER cameras ... with so little effort. All the way from crippled Rebel to 5D4 and 1DX2. That's irksome from a paying customers's perspective. But Canon Defense League around here prefers to see things as if they were paid Canon lobbyists. 

2. Canon does not even build some of the cameras they should be building. 
A. high(er)-end APS-C mirrorless body/bodies ... fully competitive or preferably even BETTER than A6300, Fuji XT2 ... all EOS M bodies to date are severly sub-par in performance, simply not good enough, much less "really good or even GREAT ...
B. mirrorless FF system ... fully competitive - or even BETTER - than Sony A7/R II ... 

Ever repetitive iterations of (mostly) GOOD, (mostly) big, (mostly) boring mirrorslappers is OK, but certainly *not good enough*. Especially not good enough for a self-declared "industry leader". 

From a non-canon-defense investor's point of view it is a shame and totally unnecessary that Canon let Sony and Fuji gain a foothold in the (stills) imaging market at all. Both of these players as well as Oly and Ricoh/Pentax would have been forced out of the market (just like Samsung was), had Canon built not only GOOD mirrorslpappers, but also the RIGHT cameras in GOOD time. 

However, that's Canon's problem, not mine. As a customer, I do have alternatives.


----------



## asl (Sep 3, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > ... Canon know how to make and sell cameras. Period.
> ...



I agree with this, one would think that Canon given their selection of lenses which seem to have maybe the best price/quality ration out there in many cases. Could have left little room for many of the competitors (for good or bad), if they made a some other/ in some cases better camera bodies. It seems they do not want to (as they are still doing fine), there must obviously be some economic reason they have for this. For people like you and me it might seems strange, but we are probably not in Canons priority group it. Canon defining what should be "god enough" does not cut it, some people seem to think so.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 3, 2016)

pokerz said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > ggweci said:
> ...


I am comparing with my 70d set to Canon M vs Sony E. Canon M lens lineup (Assuming Canon EF lens not working properly with M) is limited compared to Sony. But Sony lenses are either expensive or not available in desired FL. If M5 get dpaf, there is a chance of M working better with EF lens.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 3, 2016)

JamesD said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > aa_angus said:
> ...


Does it focus during video shooting? I need video AF functionality. Looks like M3 video IQ is little better than 70d output.

Thanks.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 3, 2016)

@ritholz: for Canon EOS M camera: all lenses with STM autofocus work just fine, whether it be native EF-M, or EF-S and EF. 

Only old design EF lenses (e.g. 50/1.4 with its antiquated, weirdo-from-the-start semi-USM AF drive) do not work very well with EOS M hybrid AF system ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > ... Canon know how to make and sell cameras. Period.
> ...



No, some people just see reality as it actually exists, not as it appears in the universe inside our own heads. Doesn't mean we want it to stay that way, just that we are intelligent enough to perceive reality and distinguish it from fantasy. 




AvTvM said:


> However, that's Canon's problem, not mine. As a customer, I do have alternatives.



Then why do you keep on desperately begging for Canon to build the specific camera(s) and lens(es) you personally want? Just buy those alternatives and move on... :


----------



## Rocky (Sep 3, 2016)

Ford makes Continentals and they cripple the Fiesta.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Then why do you keep on desperately begging for Canon to build the specific camera(s) and lens(es) you personally want? Just buy those alternatives and move on... :



Don't worry, I will - once I need to replace my current gear.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Then why do you keep on desperately begging for Canon to build the specific camera(s) and lens(es) you personally want? Just buy those alternatives and move on... :
> ...



Did you tell Canon that? I'm just sure they'll do anything and make any camera you want to keep you as a customer. :


----------



## pokerz (Sep 3, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> JamesD said:
> 
> 
> > ritholtz said:
> ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djOPPQycZ8g
STM vs USM in 70d, just forget the USM lens in Video AFC
u need to invest money in NEW STM lens ;D


----------



## crashpc (Sep 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Telling aleading manufacturer what to do at the edge of ones jump? Heh, too late. They had enaugh time to see where people want to jump. Jumped few months ago. Sorry Canon, maybe one day in next 10 years.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2016)

crashpc said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Good for you! Just don't fool yourself into thinking that Canon cares...


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 3, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > ... Canon know how to make and sell cameras. Period.
> ...



you've obviously never worked in any sort of real world capacity in R&D, development, production,etc have you?


----------



## time123 (Sep 3, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> ...
> That's irksome from a paying customers's perspective. But Canon Defense League around here prefers to see things as if they were paid Canon lobbyists.
> ...



LOL  The Canon Defense League to save the day! They actually are a real thing though sadly enough. Big businesses do have paid staff - generally contractors/sub-contractors who classify themselves as a "marketing" company - that have multiple accounts on multiple forums pretending to be normal Joe's that simply defend everything about the company or alternatively use every logical fallacy in the book to try to make their product look better when something is actually ridiculous about one of the products they are being paid to defend. That is literally all they do all day for their paychecks. Hello to all you shills reading this!

And that's not also including the non-paid fanboys, as the term goes, who get drummed up (sometimes with a bit of prodding from the paid folks) at the slightest idea that Canon actually is holding back or inferior in any type of way. Just an FYI but cameras are simply a means to and end and ultimately the companies just want your money, which is why competition is good and necessary.

I'll set some bait. Auto-focus point metering anyone? Even entry-level Nikon's like the D5100 from 2011 have this. But it is still exclusive to the 1D series? Really? From a DSLR perspective the Nikon D500 looks pretty sweet and I will be watching to see what Nikon does with the D820/D900. [_Brought to you by Nikon, the worlds' greatest camera system!_]

As computing processing power grows the companies who are actually willing to innovate, such as the viewfinder in the Fuji XPro 2 (hybrid OVF/EVF), will eventually catch up to if not surpass the current leaders unless the leaders actively step up their game. What also blows me away is that some companies still work on the firmware on cameras that actively add new features and enhance the camera, all for free, even after it is purchased! Not some minor junk either, such as Fuji improving the auto-focus system of the X-T1 along with lots of other useful things (http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n160204.html). Such a novel concept in this day and age. It may be 5-10 years down the road but when you only release a new high-end camera every 5 years it will really come around to bite them sooner than expected. [_Brought to you by Fuji, the worlds' greatest camera system!_]

I recognize the idea that Canon does what Canon wants and they know they can get hordes of people to buy whatever they put out regardless but realistically from a mid to long term perspective I personally don't believe that gravy train can last forever at this rate. Anyways, just some additional thoughts from a Canon guy who is more than fully invested in the Canon system.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2016)

time123 said:


> What also blows me away is that some companies still work on the firmware on cameras that actively add new features and enhance the camera, all for free, even after it is purchased! Not some minor junk either, such as Fuji improving the auto-focus system of the X-T1 along with lots of other useful things (http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n160204.html).



Companies like Canon. 

5DII – manual audio gain, etc.
7D – a 66% increase in RAW buffer depth, Auto ISO limits, etc. 
5DIII – uncompressed HDMI out, f/8 AF, etc.
1D X – f/8 AF, EC in M mode, etc. 

So if you are suggesting Canon doesn't add new functionality in old cameras via firmware, it's because either your memory or your knowledge of facts – or both – is badly flawed.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 3, 2016)

watch CDL in full swing. ;D


----------



## time123 (Sep 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> time123 said:
> 
> 
> > What also blows me away is that some companies still work on the firmware on cameras that actively add new features and enhance the camera, all for free, even after it is purchased! Not some minor junk either, such as Fuji improving the auto-focus system of the X-T1 along with lots of other useful things (http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n160204.html).
> ...



Let's pick a camera that a whole lot of people have. Latest 5D Mark III firmware upgrades:

Canon EOS 5D Mark III firmware version 1.3.3:
* Improves the AF controllability when shooting in Live View mode with a wide-angle lens (fixed focal length or zoom).
* Corrects some incorrect indications on the "English" and "Russian" menu screens.

Firmware Version 1.2.3 incorporates the following improvements and fixes:
Fixes a phenomenon in which the flash may not fire depending on the timing of when the shutter button is pressed.
Fixes a phenomenon in which the AF microadjustment value may change.*
Fixes a phenomenon in which the LCD monitor may show a line of false color along boundaries of high contrast.
Fixes a phenomenon in which the histogram of a LiveView image is incorrectly displayed when an HDMI cable is connected.
Enables the brightness of the camera's LCD monitor to be adjusted even when an HDMI cable is connected.

Those are some real barn-burners for sure. But in all seriousness taking a quick look at all of the 5d Mark III firmware updates it looks like a total of three things were added over 4.5 years:

- Enables the brightness of the camera's LCD monitor to be adjusted even when an HDMI cable is connected.
- Uncompressed HDMI output is now enabled.
- Enables the center AF point to autofocus when the camera is used with Canon EF lens/extender combinations whose combined maximum aperture is f/8.

I'm not going to analyze all of the Canon firmware updates for all the cameras but the majority of the updates are for fixing broken things. Adding "etc." with no details isn't very supportive of your case either. Many of the enhancements are generally limited to specific cases/uses and - remember, like many things on the Internet: *in my opinion* - relatively minor in comparison to such things as complete overhauls of the auto-focus system and adding things like AF eye tracking.

Just look at Magic Lantern to see all the stuff the 5d Mark III (and the 5D2, 6D, 7D, 50D, 60D, 500D/T1i, 550D/T2i, 600D/T3i, 650D/T4i, 700D/T5i, 1100D/T3, EOS M) can do but Canon decided not to include. And that was stuff put together by hackers who just decided to figured it all out. So just imagine of all the things Canon could make all of these cameras do since they have full access to the code and complete knowledge of inner workings of the camera. If that isn't evidence that these cameras are a whole lot more capable than Canon makes them out to be I don't know what is.

And you really don't need to be insulting friend, it's just a discussion on the Internet.


----------



## time123 (Sep 3, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> watch CDL in full swing. ;D



Did you read my NDL and FDL comments? I'm double dipping! Despite the fact that I only own lots of Canon gear Corporate said I still couldn't moonlight for a third (sorry Canon!).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2016)

time123 said:


> I'm not going to analyze all of the Canon firmware updates for all the cameras



No, of course you're not. You're going to provide one example from Fuji of one update to one camera. That's real effort on your part, really effective in supporting your point. 

However, you did very effectively demonstrate that Canon is quite diligent in releasing updates to address both minor issues and add major features. You should receive your CDL membership card soon. ;D


----------



## time123 (Sep 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> time123 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not going to analyze all of the Canon firmware updates for all the cameras
> ...



That's right, I'm not going to do your homework, and yes, I am going to choose an extremely popular and common camera (5D3, probably the most common one from your list) because I only have a finite amount of time to spend on Internet forums. And when I write about innovation of course I am going to use an innovative company as an example, that is the whole point. On the topic of effort I actually provided detailed information in a post rather than just saying a couple abbreviations with no actual specifics, followed by "etc." like yourself. On the 5D3 if you think only adding those three things over the timespan of 4.5 years classify as major new additions and Canon's best effort then so be it as we clearly have a difference of opinion even though Magic Lantern proved so much more could be done. I'm done; it's been fun neuroanatomist.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 4, 2016)

time123 said:


> I'm done



Oh good.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 4, 2016)

time123 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > time123 said:
> ...



Lol. You failed to do _your own_ homework. One firmware update, one camera. Pretty weak evidence, but thanks for playing!


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 4, 2016)

time123 said:


> ...the majority of the updates are for fixing broken things. Adding "etc." with no details isn't very supportive of your case either. Many of the enhancements are generally limited to specific cases/uses and - remember, like many things on the Internet: *in my opinion* - relatively minor in comparison to such things as complete overhauls of the auto-focus system and adding things like AF eye tracking.



The Fuji X system isn't even five years old yet, they're doing massive firmware updates because everything they released before this year was severely flawed.
The Mirrorless industry as a whole is so new that everything they've been doing for the last five years is basically just beta testing, whereas with the EOS ecosystem Canon achieved just about everything they really wanted to do with a digital camera nearly a decade ago.
The features that get implemented in Canon products are closer to flawless than any other manufacturer, the list of firmware updates is just proof that they pay extremely close attention to functionality.

Some people just don't agree with the specifics of how to segment their market.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 4, 2016)

I find Classic/Retro styling to be a major turn-off. I prefer good ergonomics, like those of the Sony α6300. The M3 was getting there and I had hoped that the M5 would be as good as the NEX and α6xxx.


----------



## crashpc (Sep 4, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



And so what? They can start making diapers instead of camera, not caring what do I want. That was absolutely not the point. They´re obviously loosing some users in their market for not really good reasons. Okay, let´s continue and turn the company into low-end company selling young japanese women some stuff. That doesn´t make sense.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> And so what? They can start making diapers instead of camera, not caring what do I want. That was absolutely not the point. They´re obviously loosing some users in their market for not really good reasons. Okay, let´s continue and turn the company into low-end company selling young japanese women some stuff. That doesn´t make sense.



So, because they didn't meet _your_ needs, they're going to become a low-end company? Yeah, that makes sense. : : :


----------



## crashpc (Sep 4, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > And so what? They can start making diapers instead of camera, not caring what do I want. That was absolutely not the point. They´re obviously loosing some users in their market for not really good reasons. Okay, let´s continue and turn the company into low-end company selling young japanese women some stuff. That doesn´t make sense.
> ...



You know it´s not because they don´t meet only MY needs. They don´t meet needs of many users. Some are arguing, some moved on ad bought DSLR for no other choice, some jumped already. There is no serious mid-range, nor high end MILC from Canon. That´s the topic, if you didn´t notice.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > crashpc said:
> ...



That's a good question: how can we tell how many no longer feel Canon meets their needs and have left Canon behind? If a few Internet posters say "all my friends switched" does that really tell us anything? What broad data set do you think might give us an idea of how many have "jumped" vs. how many have continued to buy?


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> And so what? They can start making diapers instead of camera, not caring what do I want. That was absolutely not the point. They´re obviously loosing some users in their market for not really good reasons. Okay, let´s continue and turn the company into low-end company selling young japanese women some stuff. That doesn´t make sense.



they know they'll always lose some users / clients.

I wonder how many people really worked in a large environment with millions of users before .. you know you'll always leak some, but you work hard at gaining in more, and trying to hit the 90% tile that will stick and give you more money.

it's impossible to satisfy each and everyone's potential whims to what they are looking for.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > crashpc said:
> ...



and how big is that?

let's assume that it's 1/3 of the mirrorless pie .. that's what .. a 8% slice of the market, fiercely competed with fuji, sony, olympus, pany?

how much R&D would Canon have to suck away from EF mount to make that work? for what?

maybe a 35% share of that pie - or 3% overall?

it's in a way cheaper for canon to let you and others to go to other vendors than to burn EF resources (and remove sales from EF front) to make a system so that absolutely everyone would be happy in the mirrorless ecosystem with canon.

and for what?

in reality even mirrorless isn't doing well in terms of sales - treading water is never a market you want to roll the hard six into.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> You know it´s not because they don´t meet only MY needs. They don´t meet needs of many users. Some are arguing, some moved on ad bought DSLR for no other choice, some jumped already. There is no serious mid-range, nor high end MILC from Canon. That´s the topic, if you didn´t notice.



exactly! and all the canon-defense-league rethoric, smoke and mirrors(lappers) does not matter. i consider it a shame for an "industry leader" whose advertising motto in german for many years has been "canon kann's, bevor es andere können" ... "Canon can, before others can" ... something's gone awfully astray at Canon, since around 2010, when their sensors were falling behind competition. zest for true innovation close to zero. iterate, re-iterate, regurgitate, mirror slap, slap, slap ... milk, milk, milk ... for all it's worth .. and then some. 

so unnecessary, so stupid, Canon!


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 4, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > You know it´s not because they don´t meet only MY needs. They don´t meet needs of many users. Some are arguing, some moved on ad bought DSLR for no other choice, some jumped already. There is no serious mid-range, nor high end MILC from Canon. That´s the topic, if you didn´t notice.
> ...



no, go find something else and quit sniffling in here.

easy.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 4, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > You know it´s not because they don´t meet only MY needs. They don´t meet needs of many users. Some are arguing, some moved on ad bought DSLR for no other choice, some jumped already. There is no serious mid-range, nor high end MILC from Canon. That´s the topic, if you didn´t notice.
> ...



Let's say you take out a large loan to open a business, perhaps a bakery. You have a special bread you love to bake, and which a few loyal customers love; however, most of of your customers want mundane breads. 

What products would you make? As an artisan baker, you would ignore the masses, bake what you want and enjoy the patronage of your small group of loyal customers. But you have expenses: your business loan, rent or mortgage on your home, feeding your family, etc. 

An artist or artisan is more free to make what they want to make; a business must make what the customers will buy at a profitable price. Canon, and all other camera companies, are not artists nor artisans; they are businesses. Their job is to repay their debts, meet monthly payroll, and return dividends to shareholders. To do otherwise would be stupid.

The second key fact is that Canon knows far better than you, or anyone else on this forum, what their customers will pay for.


----------



## crashpc (Sep 4, 2016)

Orangutan: That looks irrelevant. Nobody wants them to stop doing what they do. They can continue, AND expand sideways, delivering what more people want. 

As rrcphoto suggested - it takes some development and stuff. One half they actually have, but not sell, the other half should be "easy" to expand. 3% of the total market is enaugh to hire 5 more engineers in the development! It would pay back soon with 3%.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 4, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > crashpc said:
> ...



By this point, AvTvM is trolling. Maybe he believes what he says, maybe it's partly or wholly a persona (the 'stupid Canon' thing has become his motto). Patiently trying to explain reality is of no use, especially the hundredth time it's been done, though I salute you for trying.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> Orangutan: That looks irrelevant. Nobody wants them to stop doing what they do. They can continue, AND expand sideways, delivering what more people want.
> 
> As rrcphoto suggested - it takes some development and stuff. One half they actually have, but not sell, the other half should be "easy" to expand. 3% of the total market is enaugh to hire 5 more engineers in the development! It would pay back soon with 3%.



The pertinent question is, why do you - with no special knowledge of the actual costs, the internal workings of Canon, or evidence from the camera industry at large - assume you know better than they do?


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> Orangutan: *That looks irrelevant*. Nobody wants them to stop doing what they do. They can continue, AND expand sideways, delivering what more people want.



You're making two assumptions: (1) that you know how much it costs to provide the product: in addition to R&D, there's also tooling, distribution, support, etc. (2) that you know better than Canon how many people are willing to buy those "expand sideways" products at a profit. 

*The key point is this:* Canon knows these things better than anyone on this forum. 

Canon has a nose for profit, so if there were a worthwhile profit to be made in "sideways" products, Canon would be right there to do it. Consider the XC10/XC15: those are "sideways" products; while many of us scratch our heads, apparently Canon has sold enough of the XC10 to build an XC15. Canon has not, up to now, been all-in for mirrorless because, up to now, the market has not been there, regardless of what a vocal minority say.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 4, 2016)

scyrene said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan: That looks irrelevant. Nobody wants them to stop doing what they do. They can continue, AND expand sideways, delivering what more people want.
> ...



+100


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 4, 2016)

Internet whining from people with less business acumen than a bowling ball. :


----------



## crashpc (Sep 4, 2016)

scyrene said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan: That looks irrelevant. Nobody wants them to stop doing what they do. They can continue, AND expand sideways, delivering what more people want.
> ...



I didn´t assume I know more. Again, irrelevant question. It often takes more or different things than just knowledge. The same as I don´t develop and sell electronics by myself - I can clearly do that, but I have other reasons not to do that. I would like what are Canons reasons.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 4, 2016)

scyrene said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



I think you're right, he's soft-trolling. I'm no longer writing for him, but for others who may be lured by his self-important nonsense. Neither he nor others like him get this basic point: even the most ardent Canon fanbois want improvements in tech, features and variety. Some of us just have a better grasp of the underlying business principles that drive all of this.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 4, 2016)

insults and ad-personam attacks from Neuro. As always, when he is out of arguments.
And the usual Canon Defense league players in full action. 
Oh so concerned for Canon and their balance sheet! And so gullible, that Canon "knows it all" and is nearly or 100% INFALLIBLE! We have all seen many blunders Canon committed. 

What are you anways, you Canon Defense League posters? Just naive fanbois or paid by Canon PR? All day whining about poor Canon's profitability .. as if it were too low ... or as if it were hurt by producing a freaking awesome EOS M5 and a freaking awesome mirrorless FF system. 

Me? I am a Canon customers who demands the very best possible gear for my money from my gear suppliers! I don't give a damn about Canon's balance sheet, what I care for is my gear and my wallet.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > crashpc said:
> ...



That's an easy question to answer: profit. They have a good idea what will generate profit, and they do that. They also know what's not likely to make profit, and they don't do that.

It's entirely OK to say you would like a particular product or feature -- we all do that. It becomes silly when people proclaim that they know what will sell and make profits based on their limited personal experience.


----------



## crashpc (Sep 4, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan: *That looks irrelevant*. Nobody wants them to stop doing what they do. They can continue, AND expand sideways, delivering what more people want.
> ...



I don´t do these assumptions. You rather read better who is posting these.
1) I know part of it. Yes. What you miss is that there is more price to it than just body, camera development and distribution.
There is price of ruining competition and ruling the market.
There is hidden price in people buying into that product and buying LENSES and accessories. There might be even more. to it. For example development and debugging. It is best way to hone your product if you send it to the people to try. If you don´t do that massively, your development is weak.

2)Where did you get that? It was rrphoto, who suggested some percentage of market share. These are all irrelevant responses to me.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 4, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Oh so concerned for Canon and their balance sheet!


Error: we're not concerned about their balance sheet, but we know they are.



> that Canon "knows it all" and is nearly or 100% INFALLIBLE!


Error: no one has said that. We say only that they know *MUCH MUCH MUCH* more than you do. 



> Me? I am a Canon customers who demands the very best possible gear for my money from my gear suppliers!



As am I, with one exception: I accept the reality that a multi-billion $ company doesn't take much interest in my personal demands. My choices are to buy or not buy. Canon, Nikon, Sony, et. al. don't care about my opinion...or yours.



> I don't give a dman about Canon's balance sheet, what I care for is my gear and my wallet.


Same for me, with one exception: I understand that Canon does care about their balance sheet, so I don't go off into conspiracy-theory land about why Canon ignores their customers. Nikon and Sony would do the same if they could.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> I don´t do these assumptions. You rather read better who is posting these.
> 1) I know part of it. Yes. What you miss is that there is more price to it than just body, camera development and distribution.
> There is price of ruining competition and ruling the market.
> There is hidden price in people buying into that product and buying LENSES and accessories. There might be even more. to it. For example development and debugging. It is best way to hone your product if you send it to the people to try. If you don´t do that massively, your development is weak.



These may all be true; however, (1) the big camera makers know these factors better than anyone here;(2) Canon has a long history of making the correct decisions. While this is not a guarantee that it will continue to work, we do know they're working on newer technologies. I think it's presumptuous to believe any camera makers are not taking these into account.


----------



## crashpc (Sep 4, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > I don´t do these assumptions. You rather read better who is posting these.
> ...



Well, things are not black and white. But decisions are. Who knows how close they were to "do that" instead of "don´t do that". They did their calculations, and maybe found it would be worth straight money wise on 98% instead of 100.... Or they might miscalculate few %. 
And that would be, I believe, wrong behavior and bad message to the customer.
And Customers are these who the company relies on, not the shareholders. Rather both, but customers first.
THAT one is imagination and assumption....


----------



## overniven (Sep 4, 2016)

Seems to me that any large company that needs to support an existing infrastructure of users/systems/lenses is in many ways at a severe disadvantage when it comes to innovation. I'm sure there are hundreds of people inside these large companies that would love to build an amazing mirror less system. Supporting an existing user base is a huge PITA, especially one that you demand thousands of dollarsEuroYen etc from for your product. Had The other manufacturers had the same success in their previous generations that Canon and Nikon did, they'd be having the same issues, and you'd all be complaining about them. That being said everyone users/competitors/trolls need to keep holding Canon/Nikon's feet to the fire so they continue their slow path towards change. Competition is good. So many choices. It's an amazing time for photo equipment.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 4, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > I don't give a dman about Canon's balance sheet, what I care for is my gear and my wallet.
> ...



Come on now, Orangutan, you are clearly a lackey paid to infiltrate these forums. As am I. And everyone else he disagrees with! :


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 4, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> These may all be true; however, (1) the big camera makers know these factors better than anyone here;



Please show me broad-based, hard data and evidence for your opinion.  ;D

Until then I consider it erroneous. Definitely as a total forum community, we understand A LOT more about camera market demands than any camera maker. They could not possibly afford a sample as huge, as global and as knowledgable as this forum community.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 4, 2016)

AvTvM said:



> Definitely as a total forum community, we understand A LOT more about camera market demands than any camera maker. They could not possibly afford a sample as huge, as global and as knowledgable as this forum community.



I was wrong. Some on this forum have even less business acumen than a minuscule bit of cat feces rolled flat by that bowling ball, which already had no understanding of business and markets. 

Conservatively, Canon sells about 5 million ILCs per year. If just 10% of those people register their purchases, that's data on demographics, buying practices, and other gear owned for *500,000* customers per year. Plus the surveys they conduct. Plus the 3rd party market research they contract out. 

There are ~12K members on this forum, and if you ignore those who've never posted, it's far less. If you ignore those who are complete idiots, that number goes down even further. 

But I do understand that to you, the only opinion that matters is that held by one person, who happens to have even less business acumen than bacertia growing on flattened cat feces.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 4, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Definitely as a total forum community, we understand A LOT more about camera market demands than any camera maker. They could not possibly afford a sample as huge, as global and as knowledgable as this forum community.
> ...



Neuro, may I ask you to tone your responses down a bit. We are not discussing feces here or anybody's business acumen. We have an interesting internet discussion on whether there might be any wisdom at all in Canon withholding a kick-ass mirrorless camera from the market for so many years. Even with an APS-C sensor, not to mention FF sensored. 

Sales data for past mirrorless Canon cameras - all of them clearly sub-par compared to competitive offerings - are not much of a predictor for what market potential "really right" and great mirrorless Canon EOS cameras might have. The only thing that counts from your statement above are ... SURVEYS. And that's where my previous statement comes in: I said, Canon could never ever afford a survey with a sample as large, knowledgeable, diverse and global as this forum community. Not to mention ALL photography gear related forum/internet communities around. And even if they could pay all 12k members on this forum and not only a few  ... they could never ask all the right questions to arrive at as deep an understanding of what their customers and the market demands as you get by reading our postings.

On aggregate, people do know MUCH BETTER ... than politicians and corporations, including *infallably stupid* ;D Canon. Seriously! 8)


----------



## Otara (Sep 4, 2016)

Yes people as a group do often know what they want much better than 'experts'. You dont even seem to realise you're actually arguing against yourself.


----------



## Hector1970 (Sep 4, 2016)

It's a pity the tone on the forum gets so confrontational at times when all people are doing is expressing opinions. 
Some people need to realise they are not always right and other opinions if they differ does not mean they are stupid.
People make exaggerated claims or claims not fully supported by facts even so sometimes they are valid.
I've no doubt Canon are clever and know their customers. 
No company though is 100% sure about the future.
Often what worked in the past suddenly doesn't work anymore.
There are lots a big companies who fall apart because they don't move with the times.
Canon have an advantage because their lens are so good.
They don't need to push the boat out too far on their cameras, they just need not to lag too far behind.
It's worked so far but the mirrorless sector is a threat to Canon.
There are always newer generations coming up. 
A mirrored full frame DSLR will look like an old Betamax to them.
Thankfully for Canon their ownership base is older and heavily invested in their glass.
There is no compelling reason for them to move yet.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 5, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> On aggregate, people do know MUCH BETTER



Now this makes some sense; however, this forum -- even all the camera forums in the world -- are not the "aggregate" that knows much better. The "aggregate" is the total of the camera-buying public. So far the "aggregate" continues to buy digital reflex cameras, and continues to not buy mirrorless in large numbers. That applies to MFT, Sony's high-end, or the well-reviewed and reasonably priced Fuji XT series. That's what the "aggregate" of people have to say on the subject.

To repeat, yet again: you are entitled to your opinions, and even entitled to try to persuade others to agree with you. But your opinions are not objective facts.


----------



## JamesD (Sep 5, 2016)

I am going to reply to this best practice business debate only once because first and foremost it is totally off topic. The people on this forum do not make up a majority of camera end users by any stretch of the imagination.

I would say 90% here on a regular basis are people who either want to turn this into a hard core hobby, those that already have, and those who use cameras professionally. There is a very good reason you cannot buy a full frame camera in Wall-Mart, granddad, grandmother, mom, dad, sister, brother, boyfriend, and girlfriend do not buy them for special days spent with each other. 

The number of full frame cameras is trivial when compared to models with C, 4/3, and smaller sensors and its because the people that buy those smaller simpler cameras make up the majority of the market by a wide margin. It is that simple.

I want my perfect camera just as much as anyone. Due to its current price The Sony A7 would be it if it had in camera image stabilization. The Fuji would if it had a full frame sensor with an A7 price. Same for the Canon M3, same for the Nikon V1, or one of the Panasonic, or any other name brand small camera.

We all want more because we know what might be possible. Now getting what I want in a body only camera for 1200.00 or less is not something that is out there right now. * It is flat out not made by anyone.*

But every one of the major camera companies is getting closer each year. With all this being said, I am not going to waste any more of my time or yours complaining about what I can't get, instead I am going to enjoy and learn how to use what I have and can get.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 5, 2016)

JamesD said:


> I am going to reply to this best practice business debate only once because first and foremost it is totally off topic. The people on this forum do not make up a majority of camera end users by any stretch of the imagination.
> 
> I would say 90% here on a regular basis are people who either want to turn this into a hard core hobby, those that already have, and those who use cameras professionally. There is a very good reason you cannot buy a full frame camera in Wall-Mart, granddad, grandmother, mom, dad, sister, brother, boyfriend, and girlfriend do not buy them for special days spent with each other.
> 
> ...



+10


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 5, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Neuro, may I ask you to tone your responses down a bit.



Fair enough. My apologies. 




AvTvM said:


> We have an interesting internet discussion on whether there might be any wisdom at all in Canon withholding a kick-ass mirrorless camera from the market for so many years. Even with an APS-C sensor, not to mention FF sensored.



Well, based on your repeated characterization of them, I suspect you'd say there's no wisdom in it. Yet...they have not done as you suggest, so presumably _they_ see wisdom in it. Given that they are in a vastly superior position to you when it comes to evaluating their resources and what the development of new camera lines entails, and given that they have far more market data than you, it is clear they are in a far better position to make those decisions.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 5, 2016)

Hector1970 said:


> No company though is 100% sure about the future.



Nobody sensible would claim that, and nobody here has that I've seen.



Hector1970 said:


> It's worked so far but the mirrorless sector is a threat to Canon.



Citation needed. The fact is, mirrorless has been touted as a threat to DSLRs for years, and so far they're still a niche. Most people seem to agree that mirrorless technology will become the norm - eventually. But that's just a matter of one type of camera being replaced by another. It doesn't threaten Canon - they already produce moderately successful mirrorless cameras, and will make more when they see the market going that way.



Hector1970 said:


> A mirrored full frame DSLR will look like an old Betamax to them.



I suspect some successful mirrorless cameras in the future will look more or less exactly like DSLRs. That's simply because of ergonomics, especially with larger lenses.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 5, 2016)

I always find it amusing how some that probably still live in their mom's basement know more about the overall industry than a company that has staff and resources that does nothing else.

As far as canon being a sales flop in mirrorless. What?

Thom estimates and my estimates are around the same that canon right now is sitting #2-3 in mirrorless globally.

Now anytime some company can invest nearly nothing and capture a significant portion of the market. That dude gets a raise. That's a success no matter what bias you have against the product.

Think about it.. with four cameras total, six lenses... They overtook Olympus, the crown jewel of m43.

None of us may like canons strategy, I don't, but you have to be a madman to state or think what they are doing isn't brilliant and working.

As far as this forum knowing? That's embarrassing. We are enthusiasts and greedy bastards. We want them to make what we will buy, not what canon long term is positioning.

Canon works on a long term 5-10 year plan. No one has any idea what canon is thinking short or long term..


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 5, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> Think about it.. with four cameras total, six lenses... They overtook Olympus, the crown jewel of m43.
> ...



Yes, think about it. With the same limited assortment of EOS M lenses, if Canon had (addition ally to M/2/10) released a great EOS "M3 Pro" a little before Sony launched its A6000 and then a kick-ass EOS M5 "Pro" just a little before Sony launched the A6300 ... they could now easily be number #1 in non-FF sensored mirrorless camera market, rather than #3 bottom-dweller, selling sub-par bodies with 1 kit lens only to a target group of happy-snapper japanese girls. 

And if know-it-all-best Canon had not made the terrible mistake to price their first EOS M at a whopping 899 rather than 499 [a bit lower than cheapest rebel, as there is no viewfinder) , they would have gone to #1 in mirrorless sales in Europe and USA in the 2nd year after launch. Canon knows ... bruhahaha! Greedy basterds, got fires-sale burnt. lol.


----------



## Empyrean (Sep 5, 2016)

Hi all,

I'm new to the forums, however follow the site quite regularly to keep an eye out for an upgrade of my current mirror less (EOS M). I've definitely been tempted by some of the competition (Sony Ax, Fuji X-T2), however am uncertain if I want to switch to their ecosystems and "philosophies" on camera functionality (not to mention their horrid menu structures!)

When it comes to the M on these forums, there's a lot of parallels to the community on the BlackBerry forums -- clearly there are huge Canon-fans who disagree with what the company is doing. However, often as fans we tend to zero in on one aspect of the business and fail to see the overarching strategy. With BlackBerry, much to the chagrin of BB fans, it was the inevitable deprioritization of hardware and shift to software. I love the tactile feedback of physical keyboard and thousands of QWERTYphiles will agree with me, but it just isn't a smart move for BBRY to invest in such a niche.

Canon, however, is in a much better position: they have active hardware lines that are proftable. I don't know if that will always be the case -- they've actively started selling their global shutter sensors to whoever needs them -- which is an interesting move in and of itself.

Both Nikon and Canon have been basically spectators in the mirrorless arena, which is frustrating to us as consumers, but not entirely foolish. Samsung shut down their very well-received mirrorless operations a little while back and Sony's aggressive push and investment into a new immature market is something they've done time and time again (and years later they end up closing that entire division entirely), so it can't be used to determine the profitability of a market.

My whole point is, there is no rush for Canon/Nikon. "Time" works in a very different way for corporations than us mere mortals. Sony can play Tesla all it wants and grow the market, but invariably when the jackpot becomes sweet enough for Canon and Nikon to make a move, they'll be upping their game and making a real play for 1st.


----------



## mitchel2002 (Sep 5, 2016)

i would be very interested in a eos m5, and if canon would have dpaf and a evf i would go for it 
but with out the 70s ergonomics plz!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 5, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> And if know-it-all-best Canon had not made the terrible mistake to price their first EOS M at a whopping 899 rather than 499 [a bit lower than cheapest rebel, as there is no viewfinder) , they would have gone to #1 in mirrorless sales in Europe and USA in the 2nd year after launch. Canon knows ... bruhahaha! Greedy basterds, got fires-sale burnt. lol.



What was the production and distribution cost for the EOS M? It seems unlikely that they sold it for a loss, so the fire sale pricing just meant less profit. Which means units sold at the launch price and the initial discount price had a whopping profit margin. 

As usual in your debates, Canon has the last laugh...all the way to the bank. Bwaahaahaa!


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 5, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> As usual in your debates, Canon has the last laugh...all the way to the bank. Bwaahaahaa!



all the way to a phenomal #3 market position. In the japanese school girl camera market, that is. "industry leader". Know-it-all-perfectly-well Canon. bruhahaha!


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 5, 2016)

btw, if innovative Canon 8) puts one of these global shutter sensors http://global.canon/en/news/2016/20160831.html
into an all-round kick-ass EOS M5 without mechanical shutter, I will buy one. 

But unfortunately, they want to put the cool stuff into cars, drons and robots .. but not into great mechanics-free, solid-state digital cameras: 
http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Companies/Canon-wants-its-image-sensors-in-others-cars-robots
Absolutely NOT stupid, Canon! But not so good for camera customers.


----------



## Orangutan (Sep 5, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > As usual in your debates, Canon has the last laugh...all the way to the bank. Bwaahaahaa!
> ...



What does this term mean to you?


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 5, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > "industry leader"
> ...



not necessarily the one with highest sales volume. But the company that stands head and shoulders over its industry, leads innovation, drives vision, powers ahead, steams in front, offers the best products, service, and customer experience. You know, what companies like Daimler-Benz, IBM, HP, Miele, 3M, Coca-Cola, Leica etc. ONCE were ... back in their day ... when such qualities could still be found ... today ... pffft ... lots of hot air and Chinamade everywhere.  

To me, Canon was industry leader in digital (stills) imaging gear when their cameras and CMOS sensors ruled supreme. About 2000 to 2010 or so, give or take a year ...


----------



## Ebrahim Saadawi (Sep 5, 2016)

So what do we actually want? what would it take to please everybody? 

-Do a fullreadout of it to 4K, to an effcient compreased codec, in a small body, no fans, without overheating
-Or have a Global shutter sensor with magically acceptable lowlight performance? 
-Or have all the features of a higher end product (FF, 30mp, DPAF, 4k) yet at rebel/eos m price
-Or have tons of lenses designed, made and released before the Company even still are sure of the entire line.

All of these would be cool. I'd take the EOS M5 with the 80D sensor DR doing 4K 60p + CLOG with DPAF and high end EVF, large battery, high burst rate with a CFAST + UHSII SD slot, Plus a parallel anouncement for M lenses:

-22mm f/2 IS 
-35mm f/2 IS 
-50mm f/2 IS 
-85mm f/2.8 IS 
-18-150mm IS at a tiny size. 
-A Canon EF to EF-M Focal reducer. 

It's not gonna happen. Because of technicalities, some of which are actually impossible to make for Canon (ful readout 4k, 60p at mirrorless size - it fries the 1DXII and the A6300, or large battery/low consumption at mirrorless size). And some of which are marketing based. There's a rule you need to be aware of when expecting future releases. They will not releaae a better camera than a newly announced one at a lower price. Better at a higher price? Sure. 1DXII is almost the perfect photo/video camera of the planet, because they aren't limited to cutting a higher end product (well, except for the 1DC, so removed C'Log, Look, even the highest end 1DXII gets some of it) 

So what do we expect? 

The current M3 is a Rebel in a mirrorless body. 

A more pro version would most definitely be an 80D in a mirrorless body. But not a single step above the 80D. 

It will have the 80D featute set without the battery and OVF and durability, but you get in return a smaller camera and an EVF if you prefer it plus peaking and theae two are very cool for videographers when paired together) 

-A new body design that's BOLD. See what Canon is doing to the lower line. They'rr going for BOLD VINTAGE LINES.
-EVF.
-300-400 shots battery vs 1000ish with an 80D (real world not cipa) 
-Same 80D sensor, 
-Same DPAF 
-Same 1080p 60p
-Same Touchacreen
-Same two wheel dials 
-Same one SD card slot 

A solid entry for Canon in the Mirrorless market for photographers. It's A6300 level but a Canon, so great. The M5 wi
l be a hit. But in the videography world (aside from V-loggera) it will be slaughtered on announcement. Which Canon knows and is not making this camera for those people anyway! (hard to understand that the company could make something not for you, how could they!!)

For those still waiting for Canon to lead the low-end video market again, I am sorry. It's over. 

They're trying/leading at only the 3000+ arena. And they take comfort that anything Canon has made since the 550D will allow you to make a groundbreaking film if you have the talent for it. 

No the M5 will not be the revival of Canon video because it has an EVF and peaking. It will have no more the 1080p, no more than 60p, normal quality video that's a little soft with hints of aliasing. Again, just like the 80D. It will not be the revival of Canon lowend video many are waiting for, but it will be a camera that can produce some awesome video/film nonetheless, in the right hands. The 80D is making a very high success in video and the m5 will top it off with an EVF and peaking. So fine really.


----------



## buddy_gi (Sep 6, 2016)

http://imgur.com/a/eixPQ

M5 back


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

Ebrahim Saadawi said:


> -A new body design that's BOLD. See what Canon is doing to the lower line. They'rr going for BOLD VINTAGE LINES.
> -EVF.
> -300-400 shots battery vs 1000ish with an 80D (real world not cipa)
> -Same 80D sensor,
> ...



since it would be canon's first vintage camera it would be bound to be a hit .. especially if they do it well on the lines of Fuji.

I think a TON would buy a canon M-AE1

the only above caveat would be that it would require a LP-E6N battery, and not the mirrorless LP-E17 battery pack.

what would be interesting to see if they could make a double battery pack ie: fit two LP-E17's in the grip housing,etc to expand the battery life up to 500+.

I for one hope we see an offsetted microlens, or mirrorless designed sensor and NOT the 80D sensor.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

buddy_gi said:


> http://imgur.com/a/eixPQ
> 
> M5 back



nice drawing!


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > And if know-it-all-best Canon had not made the terrible mistake to price their first EOS M at a whopping 899 rather than 499 [a bit lower than cheapest rebel, as there is no viewfinder) , they would have gone to #1 in mirrorless sales in Europe and USA in the 2nd year after launch. Canon knows ... bruhahaha! Greedy basterds, got fires-sale burnt. lol.
> ...



when the M came out, the yen was at an all time low.


----------



## buddy_gi (Sep 6, 2016)

Here are both sides.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 6, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > As usual in your debates, Canon has the last laugh...all the way to the bank. Bwaahaahaa!
> ...



#3 in Japan based on BCN for 2015. Possibly #2 globally based on Thom Hogan's estimate. That's with an _extremely limited_ investment in R&D and production – they're clearly not trying hard in the MILC space. But that's very logical – why should they? The dSLR segment of the ILC market is the lion's share, and Canon dominates it. The M line appears to be part of Canon's strategy to be ready when – or _if_ – mirrorless becomes the majority of the ILC market. If the current trend slopes continue, that should happen sometime after we're all dead (quite possibly, a disruptive imaging technology – which mirrorless isn't – will kill ILCs as a whole before that happens). 

Also, let's be clear – I never said that Canon knows it all...just that they know a helluva lot about making and selling cameras than _you_.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

buddy_gi said:


> Here are both sides.



legit or just drawings? we all want to know now


----------



## dolina (Sep 6, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> buddy_gi said:
> 
> 
> > Here are both sides.
> ...



Looks like something a design student would do for a school project.

TBH I'd rather buy a Sony today than a Canon tomorrow. Technology-wise Sony's mirrorless is superior to any Canon *mirrorless*.

Emphasizing mirrorless because someone... someone. someone.


----------



## Rocky (Sep 6, 2016)

I cannot understand why people are so upset about the Ms and canon does not make a mirrorless with all the features that every body has asked for. My personal opinion is all the Ms are aiming at the followings and has been fulfill then with excellence: 1. small (borderline on pocketable with the 22 mm lens) 2. Reasonable priced, about $400. 3. Got enough "smaller" lens to cover from 11mm to 250mm at a reasonable price. any focal length longer than 250mm or shorter than 11mm belongs to the "Elite" group. Some people complain about there is no fast prime or fast zoom. These will defeat the concept of small and reasonable price. I do agree that the AF should be faster. For me it is good enough because I do not shoot sports, children or birds. I like the Ms so much that the M and the M2 replaced my 40D and 20D as my travel cameras and doing the job very well. I do not even miss my 40D or 20D. I did not get the M3 due to the larger size and the Powershot interface. I am looking forward to see the M5.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 6, 2016)

Rocky said:


> I cannot understand why people are so upset about the Ms and canon does not make a mirrorless with all the features that every body has asked for. My personal opinion is all the Ms are aiming at the followings and has been fulfill then with excellence: 1. small (borderline on pocketable with the 22 mm lens) 2. Reasonable priced, about $400. 3. Got enough "smaller" lens to cover from 11mm to 250mm at a reasonable price. any focal length longer than 250mm or shorter than 11mm belongs to the "Elite" group. *Some people complain about there is no fast prime or fast zoom.* These will defeat the concept of small and reasonable price. I do agree that the AF should be faster. For me it is good enough because I do not shoot sports, children or birds. I like the Ms so much that the M and the M2 replaced my 40D and 20D as my travel cameras and doing the job very well. I do not even miss my 40D or 20D. I did not get the M3 due to the larger size and the Powershot interface. I am looking forward to see the M5.



Fast zooms will definitely be large. Fast primes, not so much...


----------



## Woody (Sep 6, 2016)

dolina said:


> TBH I'd rather buy a Sony today than a Canon tomorrow. Technology-wise Sony's mirrorless is superior to any Canon *mirrorless*.



Any MILC with DPAF (or equivalent) *and* touchscreen gets my vote.

At the moment, neither Sony nor Canon has anything that gets my vote.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

to me the rumored M5 drawing unfortunately looks legit. It looks distinctively "Canon". And it is basically as big and fat and ugly as n SL-1 rebel. I do fear, we will get basically a mirrorless SL-2 .. only with EF-M mount.

"fast" primes ... I am not asking for f/1.2 or f/1.4 clunkers costing 1000+ like Fuji sells to their naive customers. I am perfectly happy with my small, good and dirt cheap EF-M 22/2.0. 

I am missing only one more EF-M prime lens, a "faster than zooms" short tele/portrait prime. Something like a EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM - *as compact as possible*, *optically as decent as the 22/2" and also reasonably priced. 

EF-M lens lineup is very good and not a problem at all. The problem are Canon EOS M camera bodies. Powershot firmware/UI ... give me a break! No model with built-in EVF ... give me a break. Sensors and AF system subpar ... give me a break! "industry leader" Canon. So stupid.


----------



## gpp (Sep 6, 2016)

Ebrahim Saadawi said:


> So what do we actually want? what would it take to please everybody?
> 
> -Do a fullreadout of it to 4K, to an effcient compreased codec, in a small body, no fans, without overheating
> -Or have a Global shutter sensor with magically acceptable lowlight performance?
> ...



Estimated price?


----------



## warrior (Sep 6, 2016)

Here is some info on upcoming M5 from trusted (but not verified yet) source from Japan devision.

Canon EOS M5 - name 100%
NO 80D sensor, but similar 90%
NO DPAF! 100%
New AF improved. More AF points 100%
NO 4K 100%
NO 50/60 Full HD recording 90%
NO weather sealing 100%

There will be a viewfinder 100%

NO any fast prime lenses with this announcment 100%

quite dissapointing for some .. but let see what coming..


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

warrior said:


> Here is some info on upcoming M5 from trusted (but not verified yet) source from Japan devision.
> 
> Canon EOS M5 - name 100%
> NO 80D sensor, but similar 90%
> ...



AF Hybrid IV then .. THAT would actually not surprise me. however if it's a 24MP sensor, with ADC and tweaked microlenses for mirrorless, that would be a huge step forward then the M3. it wouid also mean that canon was finally serious about the EOS-M .. before they just shoved a DSLR sensor in there.

not sure what's the disappointment..


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> to me the rumored M5 drawing unfortunately looks legit. It looks distinctively "Canon". And it is basically as big and fat and ugly as n SL-1 rebel. I do fear, we will get basically a mirrorless SL-2 .. only with EF-M mount.
> 
> EF-M lens lineup is very good and not a problem at all. The problem are Canon EOS M camera bodies. Powershot firmware/UI ... give me a break! No model with built-in EVF ... give me a break. Sensors and AF system subpar ... give me a break! "industry leader" Canon. So stupid.



wait.. so your first paragraph you complain about EVF hump.. then you complain none have an EVF...

okay! got it! .. :


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

M5 with less than 80D sensor and capabilities [except OVF and separate Phase-AF unit] would be disappointing. Combined with large size, "mini-DSLR"-form factor as in the rumored drawing I would definitely not buy it. 

Video stuff? Don't care for it, but less than 80D would be laughable in late 2016.

Weather sealing? Don't think so. Would be of limited use anyway, since no current EF-M lens has sealing. Personally I had no moisture problems with M (1st gen) and lenses. Once it fell into snow while backcountry ski touring, next thing I accidentally ran over it with my skis' steel edge :-[ and had to search for the camera in the snow ... but no water ingress at all. Probably I was just lucky, I guess.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > to me the rumored M5 drawing unfortunately looks legit. It looks distinctively "Canon". And it is basically as big and fat and ugly as n SL-1 rebel. I do fear, we will get basically a mirrorless SL-2 .. only with EF-M mount.
> ...



You claim some contradiction? ;-)
Not at all. 

I want is I would prefer a pop-up EVF top left corner. Just look at Sony RX100 3 and 4 or Sony RX-1R II. Of course in combinmation with Canon Touch-LCD ... since stupid Sony in their "we-know-the-market-perfectly-well attitude" has decided not to put *fully articulated touchscreens* onto their cameras. 

This is how I want to carry my MILC ;D






This is how I want to use my MILC ;D


----------



## warrior (Sep 6, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> warrior said:
> 
> 
> > Here is some info on upcoming M5 from trusted (but not verified yet) source from Japan devision.
> ...



Probably will be still avarege in AF speed in continious video shooting mode. Dont forget many use this cameras as a great video camera . eos m 1 orovided great video quality in small form factor but AF was terrible even wurh updated firmware. Eos m3 still slow unreliable AF. Many put big hopes that eos m5 will have eventially good AF for continious af tracking. At least in pair with lumix g7 g8 . if not.. That the biggest dissapintment.


----------



## 1kind (Sep 6, 2016)

warrior said:


> Here is some info on upcoming M5 from trusted (but not verified yet) source from Japan devision.
> 
> Canon EOS M5 - name 100%
> NO 80D sensor, but similar 90%
> ...


Incorrect on DPAF


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

1kind said:


> warrior said:
> 
> 
> > Here is some info on upcoming M5 from trusted (but not verified yet) source from Japan devision.
> ...



source?


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 6, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > And if know-it-all-best Canon had not made the terrible mistake to price their first EOS M at a whopping 899 rather than 499 [a bit lower than cheapest rebel, as there is no viewfinder) , they would have gone to #1 in mirrorless sales in Europe and USA in the 2nd year after launch. Canon knows ... bruhahaha! Greedy basterds, got fires-sale burnt. lol.
> ...



I bought my EOS-M years ago for something like $369 USD, including the 22/2 lens and a flash. It was a great deal and I still love it as a small, carry around camera. Now, as you know, none of my posts are complete without a call for 4K video, so: 

If they make an M5 or other M model with 4K video, I would gladly pay up to $1500 for one. 

Yeah, I know it's not going to happen, but I'm still going to ask for it. And I think they could make a lot more money if they did that, too. I'm just saying, Canon, you could sell a boatload and make a lot more money.


----------



## warrior (Sep 6, 2016)

Defenetly no 4K in eos m5. 

The rumored price is between 799-899 USD for body only.

I nearly went for eos m3. but now i'm waiting myself what canon will offer with eos m5. 
I hope this time they will not screw it as with eos m2/m3. 

But according to most rumors - eos m5 will not be a revolutionary camera again, instead it will be just better then eos m3, better enaugh for most canon users to switch from m1/m2/m3 to m5, but sony, pana/oly users probbaly will not switch from 4k cameras to newly burn out of date full hd capabilities of eos m5. No 4K in nearly 2017 is a fail for any mirrorles camera.

No much hope..


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 6, 2016)

warrior said:


> Defenetly no 4K in eos m5.
> 
> The rumored price is between 799-899 USD for body only.
> 
> ...



Agreed- not much hope. But the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Or so they keep saying. If it had 4K, Canon could sell it for $1999 and still sell a boatload. 

Also, as people on here are fond of saying, because Canon makes cameras for specific users, those users will still buy a 5DIV for that camera's capabilities and the M5 (or whatever new mirrorless) would not cannibalize it.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Sep 7, 2016)

Rocky said:


> I cannot understand why people are so upset about the Ms and canon does not make a mirrorless with all the features that every body has asked for. My personal opinion is all the Ms are aiming at the followings and has been fulfill then with excellence: 1. small (borderline on pocketable with the 22 mm lens) 2. Reasonable priced, about $400. 3. Got enough "smaller" lens to cover from 11mm to 250mm at a reasonable price. any focal length longer than 250mm or shorter than 11mm belongs to the "Elite" group. Some people complain about there is no fast prime or fast zoom. These will defeat the concept of small and reasonable price. I do agree that the AF should be faster. For me it is good enough because I do not shoot sports, children or birds. I like the Ms so much that the M and the M2 replaced my 40D and 20D as my travel cameras and doing the job very well. I do not even miss my 40D or 20D. I did not get the M3 due to the larger size and the Powershot interface. I am looking forward to see the M5.



Good post.


----------



## JamesD (Oct 3, 2016)

I am going to hold off on the M5. I don't feel like Canon put enough into it to justify the $900.00 price. An A6300 and a A7 are better from the specs I have seen. I do understand if you are invested in the M Lenses though.


----------

