# EOS-M With Viewfinder Coming Late 2013? [CR]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 4, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12155"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12155">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>The Next EOS-M


</strong>If you were hoping for a quick update to the EOS-M, apparently we won’t be able to buy one until the second half of 2013. The next model will indeed have an electronic viewfinder, something Canon omitted from the current EOS-M apparently because their EVF technology was not ready for prime time. It’s also mentioned that a viewfinder on the next EOS-M will not be a hybrid ovf/evf like some of the competition.</p>
<p>Looking for a retro EOS-M? Not happening according to the story, the design of the next EOS-M will be in the same style as the current model.</p>
<p>I’ve been told that the announcement will come in late Q1, early Q2 in 2013. A lot can change between now and then though.</p>
<p><strong>Source [<a href="http://www.canonwatch.com/canon-eos-m-with-built-in-evf-coming-the-second-half-of-2013/" target="_blank">CW</a>]</strong></p>
<p><em>image from <a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3240955" target="_blank">DPR forum</a> mockup</em></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## eddiemrg (Dec 4, 2012)

Canon please... don't act like APPLE: same device with nothing new....


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 4, 2012)

Will not on my shopping cart until I see FF sensor.


----------



## Ricku (Dec 4, 2012)

Awesome! I will buy this one instantly!! ......... If it comes with a full frame sensor.


----------



## lola (Dec 4, 2012)

I'd rather have them work better AF instead of an EVF...


----------



## hiplnsdrftr (Dec 4, 2012)

Honestly, would rather have a built in flash than a viewfinder. Viewfinder would be OK, as long as it is way more integrated than that horrible bump on the mockup.

Would have bought the M if it had a flash. Could care less about a viewfinder.


----------



## tapanit (Dec 4, 2012)

Does [CR] without a number mean even less plausible than [CR0]?


----------



## hambergler (Dec 4, 2012)

For those asking for full frame it's not happening any time soon and if it does than I'd expect a minimum of 3499 and a non EF mount due to the flange distance is not suitable for anything remotely compact. I'm sure an EF adapter would be possible but pretty much the best you are looking at is Leica M9 @ $4000 with autofocus and a new lens lineup that is not EF compatible and at canon L prices.


I'd much rather see something comparative with the fuji xe-1 which has pretty much the best aps-c sensor

Good AF, good lens lineup size, great control scheme and awesome styling


----------



## ajt36 (Dec 4, 2012)

I'd rather have a shoe-mount VF so I can take it on/off when I want to and maintain the compactness. Since all I mostly use is the 22mm lens, it'd be nice if a third party came up with a shoe-mount optical VF set for 22mm. I'd buy that.

Otherwise, Canon needs *to fix the AF*. I've had the M for several weeks and the AF is not great with the assist lamp. Recently turned off the assist lamp and it is even worse. I don't know why Canon ever thought the AF was ready for "prime time". 

_If they want to know where to focus for the next M, it is AF, not VF._


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 4, 2012)

hambergler said:


> For those asking for full frame it's not happening any time soon and if it does than I'd expect a minimum of 3499 and a non EF mount due to the flange distance is not suitable for anything remotely compact. I'm sure an EF adapter would be possible but pretty much the best you are looking at is Leica M9 @ $4000 with autofocus and a new lens lineup that is not EF compatible and at canon L prices.
> 
> 
> I'd much rather see something comparative with the fuji xe-1 which has pretty much the best aps-c sensor
> ...



What are they waiting for? I DO NOT wish to mount my EF 24-70 or 70-200 on that tiny thing - what's is the point buying mirrorless ???


----------



## c.d.embrey (Dec 4, 2012)

Canon Rumors said:


> The next model will indeed have an electronic viewfinder, something Canon omitted from the current EOS-M apparently because their *EVF technology was not ready for prime time*.



The *focusing technology wasn't ready for prime time*, but Canon didn't seem to care 




> Looking for a retro EOS-M? Not happening according to the story, the design of the next EOS-M will be in the same style as the current model.



The one thing Canon got right is the styling  The world doesn't need another effing retro camera.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Dec 4, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> What are they waiting for? I DO NOT wish to mount my EF 24-70 or 70-200 on that tiny thing - what's is the point buying mirrorless ???



*The point* of small/light weight mirrorless cameras is that they are *small and leight weight*. Always use the right tool for the job. The EOS-M is not the right tool for big/bulky/heavy zoomz, but it could be the right tool for small/non-bulky/light weight primes.


----------



## ajt36 (Dec 4, 2012)

c.d.embrey said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > What are they waiting for? I DO NOT wish to mount my EF 24-70 or 70-200 on that tiny thing - what's is the point buying mirrorless ???
> ...



I've been using my M with the 22mm lens and a 60mm EF-S macro with the adapter until Canon releases another prime in that range. The 60mm is about the limit of what I'd want to put on the M in terms of size and weight (basically about 12 ounces and 3" long without the EF adapter). I've messed around with the M using a 24-105 and a 70-200mm, even a 300mm/4, but if you want to shoot lenses that size with it, you need a VF... something to put up to your face so you can balance a lens of that size. And if that's the case, IMO you are better off with a Rebel.

I hope Canon will release a decent compliment of EF-M lenses with useful focal lengths. Don't need a 300 or 400 mm, but a few primes (maybe, a 15mm, 30mm, and 60mm to go with the 22mm) and a couple of zooms (a 15-60mm/4 IS, a 45-200mm/4~5.6 IS) would be nice and what I think they'd need to offer in order to compete with the 4/3 lens selection.


----------



## hambergler (Dec 4, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> hambergler said:
> 
> 
> > For those asking for full frame it's not happening any time soon and if it does than I'd expect a minimum of 3499 and a non EF mount due to the flange distance is not suitable for anything remotely compact. I'm sure an EF adapter would be possible but pretty much the best you are looking at is Leica M9 @ $4000 with autofocus and a new lens lineup that is not EF compatible and at canon L prices.
> ...



Then my comment does not apply to you. I have seen way too many comments on this board wishing for a cheap EF mount compatible mirrorless FF. That is simply not going to happen. I've seen tons of people hoping for EF compatibility when IMO it is not a big selling point.

The reason the Canon EOS-M is not great is not because it lacks a FF sensor.

Poor AF, Poor ergonomics / styling, lack of built in flash and a sensor that is a generation or two behind the NEX or Fuji X are the problem right now


----------



## drjlo (Dec 4, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> Will not on my shopping cart until I see FF sensor.



X2 but I'm afraid the chance of that in Canikon land is very, very slim.


----------



## Stone (Dec 4, 2012)

drjlo said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Will not on my shopping cart until I see FF sensor.
> ...



I agree, neither company has any interest in pursuing a FF mirrorless. I'm sure they see that as a quick way to kill off their lucrative FF DSLR and lens sales. I'm thinking either Fujifilm or Sony will be the 1st to do it and I'm hoping it's done in 2013. I think Sony put out a feeler with the RX-1 to gauge interest, but the first company to produce such a camera with an acceptable (doesn't need to be pro-level) af system will get my money and probably the money of many others looking for the same thing. Buying all new compact lenses is a given....


----------



## scrup (Dec 4, 2012)

I like the red but the hump is pretty fugly.

I agree they need to fix the AF before anything else. There was a rumor on canonwatch with firmware update hopefully that comes true.

I was looking at the nex 6 as an option but the image quality is not up to par so will wait for other options.


----------



## hambergler (Dec 4, 2012)

scrup said:


> I like the red but the hump is pretty fugly.
> 
> I agree they need to fix the AF before anything else. There was a rumor on canonwatch with firmware update hopefully that comes true.
> 
> I was looking at the nex 6 as an option but the image quality is not up to par so will wait for other options.



Have you looked into the Fuji XE-1? The only reason I haven't bought one yet is I am debating a wide angle lens vs the Fuji.


----------



## ddashti (Dec 4, 2012)

In a way I think this goes against the whole purpose of the EOS-M line.


----------



## gmrza (Dec 4, 2012)

hambergler said:


> For those asking for full frame it's not happening any time soon and if it does than I'd expect a minimum of 3499 and a non EF mount due to the flange distance is not suitable for anything remotely compact. I'm sure an EF adapter would be possible but pretty much the best you are looking at is Leica M9 @ $4000 with autofocus and a new lens lineup that is not EF compatible and at canon L prices.
> 
> 
> I'd much rather see something comparative with the fuji xe-1 which has pretty much the best aps-c sensor
> ...



Any camera with a normal EF mount would still have the same flange distance as current EOS DSLRs. With a mirrorless design, all you would lose is the bulge of the pentaprism (I am assuming a pentaprism, since all full frame EOS bodies use a pentaprism).

To get any size benefits on full frame would require a new lens mount - or at least different optics, which allow for the rear element to be placed closer to the sensor. In addition, the sensor would need to cope with incident light coming from a more oblique angle - something that digital sensors do not do well. Leica has had to do some clever things with its micro-lens arrangement and IT and low-pass filters in order to get the lens closer to the sensor - something that was not a problem with film.
Even with the 85mm f/1.2 lens, Canon is doing some fudging of the sensor sensitivity because of the oblique angle at which the light strikes the sensor - the sheer size of the rear element is something to behold.

Given current technology, a full frame mirrorless camera would not give any size advantage over a DSLR. Given that OVFs are superior to EVFs, that begs the question, of why even to bother with a full frame mirrorless camera.

In my mind, APS-C mirrorless makes sense, full frame doesn't.


----------



## Caps18 (Dec 5, 2012)

I have to say that I don't see any point to having the viewfinder on this camera. I want a small camera, if I want to walk around with a big camera I will take my 5Dm2.

A built-in flash should be the biggest priority for them along with the AF.


----------



## noncho (Dec 5, 2012)

lola said:


> I'd rather have them work better AF instead of an EVF...



Absolutely!

And it's ugly and not good for pockets(even with pancake) because of this EVF.


----------



## Cb33 (Dec 6, 2012)

I see some comments here are about how the evf is unsightly or cumbersome. I just wanted to make sure that people know that the picture is not real. It is just a mock-up created by someone on dpreview forums. I highly doubt that this is what the real canon will look like when it becomes a reality.


----------



## scrup (Dec 7, 2012)

hambergler said:


> Have you looked into the Fuji XE-1? The only reason I haven't bought one yet is I am debating a wide angle lens vs the Fuji.



Fuji is out of my budget and there is no EF adapter that does AF available for it.

The main thing that the EOS-M has going for it is compatibility with EF lens.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 7, 2012)

c.d.embrey said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > What are they waiting for? I DO NOT wish to mount my EF 24-70 or 70-200 on that tiny thing - what's is the point buying mirrorless ???
> ...



That's why I said "I do not wish to mount my 24-70 + 70-200 on that tiny thing". If you travel often ask I do, you will see how FF mirrorless becomes handy.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 7, 2012)

If they Add and EVF + Fast AF, Expect 799$ body Only.


----------



## nickorando (Dec 10, 2012)

I actually think the current one works well with some bigger lenses - the 70-300L, for example.

Me, I hate EVFs, and definitely don't want one. As has been said, decent AF is what they should work on!


----------



## 9VIII (Feb 22, 2013)

All I want is a body with full professional style controls and a 300mm f4 made for the ILC format (giving the same FOV as FF but on a smaller sensor, which gives better low light performance).

I think it would be cool if they would make a body no larger in diameter than the lens mount, then a telephoto lens becomes a lot easier to pack around, and it would be ultra compact with a pancake.


----------



## zim (Feb 23, 2013)

so Cakon 1 V2 it is then @ $1200, lovely ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 24, 2013)

c.d.embrey said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > What are they waiting for? I DO NOT wish to mount my EF 24-70 or 70-200 on that tiny thing - what's is the point buying mirrorless ???
> ...



+1

Look at the micro 4/3 market... small bodies, small lenses, lower weight and price tags. After almost 4 years of micro 4/3 there are still no long lenses for the mount, and the reason is probably because there is little demand. If you are going to go to the expense of big glass and carrying the weight of big glass, then you are probably the type of person who appreciates enthusiast or pro bodies... after all, how often do you see a 600 f4 on a $300 rebel? 

There are lots of micro 4/3 sales.... I suspect that this is the market the EOS-M is targeting.


----------



## botw (Feb 25, 2013)

nickorando said:


> I actually think the current one works well with some bigger lenses - the 70-300L, for example.
> 
> Me, I hate EVFs, and definitely don't want one. As has been said, decent AF is what they should work on!



Me too. I had a NEX 7 and did not like the EVF, even though I thought it was implemented well. I've adjusted to shooting with the screen on the M and do not need or want a viewfinder for this. I have a dslr for uses where it is helpful...


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 25, 2013)

I have to say that after using the A77's EVF, I was very impressed. It would be a good substitute for OVF in a small bodied camera like the EOS-M.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Feb 27, 2013)

How about a good mount for the FD lenses - then the slow autofocus won't matter and the camera
can be a way to keep using some excellent glass?


----------



## botw (Feb 27, 2013)

I bought an FD adapter off ebay for under $20. It works great... .


----------

