# DPrevThe EOS M5 is Canon's best ever mirrorless camera, and a big disappointment



## xps (Sep 18, 2016)

Article fount at: Dpreview
The authors opinion:

https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/4495586328/the-canon-eos-m5-is-a-great-mirrorless-camera-and-a-big-disappointment


----------



## d (Sep 18, 2016)

Read it, and all I have to say is...."pffft".


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 18, 2016)

[quote author=DPR]
Behind my nagging feeling of anticlimax with the M5 is a principle, which is this: Companies that take risks, and deliver new technology to as many people as possible should be given credit. And companies that do not should be held to account. Take the Samsung NX1 – an APS-C format camera so far ahead of its time that even now it has arguably yet to be bettered. In short, it was a vastly more capable camera than it probably needed to be. As such, the NX1 (which benefitted from an aggressive and effective series of firmware updates) encapsulated the best qualities of the company that made it, just as its premature discontinuation, along with the rest of the NX line, could be said to reflect the worst.
[/quote]

Or it could be said to represent the pragmatic realization that being a technological marvel and garnering fawning praise from sites like DPR doesn't necessarily translate to either sales or profits.****** Similar things could be said of Sony. 


******It's an economics thing, ask someone with good business acumen if you can find them, on DPR and on CR forums they're rarer than a Snorlax.


----------



## d (Sep 18, 2016)

On the other hand, it's refreshing to find a recent article not paid for******* by the manufacturer.


******* As evidenced by the lack of the now usual disclaimer at the bottom of the page.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 18, 2016)

Hmm, just sounds like a rant from AvTvM to me. 'I want it all and I want it now two years ago', and in his own words despite what happened to Samsung and the fact that Sony are too frustrating to use and or actually work half the time. 

I'll take the reliable workhorse every day of the week thank you.


----------



## Alex_M (Sep 18, 2016)

yes, the Samsung NX1 camera was so far ahead of its time yet Samsung had to pull out of digital camera business in Australia. seems like a business strategy failure to me. while Canon continue to innovate. I consider DPRAW to be a major break through tech in digital camera world that brought wide and yet to be explored opportunities for real explorers of light, not so much for snapshoters.



neuroanatomist said:


> [quote author=DPR]
> Behind my nagging feeling of anticlimax with the M5 is a principle, which is this: Companies that take risks, and deliver new technology to as many people as possible should be given credit. And companies that do not should be held to account. Take the Samsung NX1 – an APS-C format camera so far ahead of its time that even now it has arguably yet to be bettered. In short, it was a vastly more capable camera than it probably needed to be. As such, the NX1 (which benefitted from an aggressive and effective series of firmware updates) encapsulated the best qualities of the company that made it, just as its premature discontinuation, along with the rest of the NX line, could be said to reflect the worst.



Or it could be said to represent the pragmatic realization that being a technological marvel and garnering fawning praise from sites like DPR doesn't necessarily translate to either sales or profits.****** Similar things could be said of Sony. 


******It's an economics thing, ask someone with good business acumen if you can find them, on DPR and on CR forums they're rarer than a Snorlax.
[/quote]


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 18, 2016)

Honestly, why do people keep going back to dpr and linking them? we know they're going to say something absurd. Take what Neuro quoted, for example. They congratulate a camera lineup that eventually went under, after it went under. Seriously. So you can have the best tech for a few years, and then make a huge loss on selling the gear used, and try again. And that's supposed to be a good thing? Slow and steady wins the race they say. I appreciate that Samsung tried to put in the best tech for the consumer, but in the long run it turned out to be the very worst thing possible for the consumer.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 18, 2016)

Funny article in a way - and of course, a totally biased and misleading headline.

When I read the entire article, it's clear that - as a camera - he actually likes it a lot. What he doesn't like is the usual techno-geek BS. He writes: "We know that Dual Pixel autofocus is a serious differentiator," and then criticizes it for not being something a user will ooh and ahh over. 

It's like: Hey I really like the camera and for stills shooters this will take excellent pics and be a pleasure to use. But I am still so disappointed because Canon is no longer the technology leader and top innovator. Well, considering the most important aspect of a camera is quality of pics, reliability, and ease of use, this kind of need for techno-innovation is so much baloney. If you want techno toys that innovate with mostly useless innovations every generation, go get your new smartphone. If you want to take great pics and have a reliable camera that is easy and fun to use,..well, go get a boring Canon.

Funny, techno-geeks want an _exciting camera_. Photographers want to take _exciting photos_. Photographers don't really care if the camera is boring.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Sep 18, 2016)

dak723 said:


> Photographers don't really care if the camera is boring.



Mates etc often look at my "pro" camera and say how complex it is, I like to point out that in fact it only has three settings, ISO, aperture and shutter speed. (yeah ok focus too - oh and zoom ~ sometimes  ) anything else is just a gimmick.

On that basis what has really changed in a camera, what more does a photographer need?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 18, 2016)

dak723 said:


> Funny, techno-geeks want an _exciting camera_. Photographers want to take _exciting photos_. Photographers don't really care if the camera is boring.



What makes you think DPR staff are photographers? They're advertainers...


----------



## d (Sep 18, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Funny, techno-geeks want an _exciting camera_. Photographers want to take _exciting photos_. Photographers don't really care if the camera is boring.
> ...



+1

There's a big difference between a photographer who writes, and a "writer" who can operate a camera. Throw in paid features and reviews, and any credibility remaining is further diluted.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 18, 2016)

I would careless about 4k or slow motion stuff. Throw in 35mm sensor in that m5, I will pre-order it.

but then again, rumor fuji is about to show off medium sensor similar x-t2 body - I'm in love


----------



## LDS (Sep 18, 2016)

IMHO, he touched a point, even if maybe unconsciously: marketing specs vs. sensible specs. You can overload the specs sheet with lots of features - maybe barely usable, hoping they aren't actually used - for the "mine is longer than yours" guy, or design a sensible camera for the target market, and don't lie (too much <G>) about it.

I wonder, for example, how many users of such camera would really need 15fps shooting, or the like. Sure, *some* user would like 15fps and 4K, and actually use it, but they would also expect they are working up to their expectations - which are usually different, for example, of someone taking a few minutes of 4K video on a phone. Add 4K on a camera, and some users will expect it will be able to shooting for an extended time. It means battery, cooling, processing etc. need to be up to the task. It may not be possible to achieve it within the design constraints - technical and financial.

So, for a customer, what is better? A features list which able to fulfill his ego (I use his because AFAIK women are less prone to this), even if some features are just there with lame implementations, or a feature list that says what actually the camera does well enough?


----------



## scottkinfw (Sep 18, 2016)

Who is this camera being made for and what are its intended uses?

Presently, I don't think it is being marketed as a 1GX/5D sucessor. I think serious photographers will consider this as possibly a second or third camera, and occasionally opt to take this instead of a heavy bag of camera gear. I think, and forgive me if I'm wrong, the majority of sales will be to people who opt for a smaller capable camera that will take good pics, and occasionally, take good video. I would guess most people in the latter group will not use every bell and whistle that the camera will come with, though it will be a selling point.

Regarding not being the best/cutting edge, I doubt that is important. What good is being cutting edge if you can't make a product to sell, and the ones you sold are orphaned? A balance must be struck between features and profitability. Menwhile, it is a step or two forward.

My 2 cents.

Scott


----------



## arthurbikemad (Sep 18, 2016)

I may get one for just that, a EF capable camera that's small and simple, just chuck it in my backpack, pick a lens from my main gear, flash gun, whatever and just go shoot.. fun time.


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 18, 2016)

scottkinfw said:


> Who is this camera being made for and what are its intended uses?



It's meant for enthusiasts/prosumers that want a lighter and smaller body than the 80D, or big body owners who want a compact but capable second body for everyday use, travel, and so on. As you said, it could also make a good second or third camera for professional shooting.

It's not a pro camera, it's an enthusiast camera, and in terms of features and price is the mirrorless equivalent to the xxD series bodies.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 18, 2016)

Why not mention these comparisons with Samsung/Sony in the countless pages they filled about M5 during past week. First time Canon implemented continuous shooting with PDAF for stills in 80d. Then they came out with M5 by making it more faster. There is no continuous shooting with PDAF 2 years back. I think, reviewer knows this. Sony ipad reference is also pretty sad. It is not just a fan boy rant. I don't know what is going with DPR. This article sounds like written by eoshd guy.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 18, 2016)

> Behind my nagging feeling of anticlimax with the M5 is a principle, which is this: Companies that take risks, and deliver new technology to as many people as possible should be given credit. And companies that do not should be held to account.



Wow, you could almost re-phrase that to: Companies that push underdeveloped products should be praised.

DPReview is a mess of tech junkies looking for their next fix at any cost.

The only remotely consumer level device I've heard of that gets almost universal praise in 4K performance is something like the Blackmagic Ursa for $5,000. Every "stills+4K" hybrid device on the market is making huge compromises of some sort.

Canon consistently makes the highest quality photograhpy products on the market, they should not be punished for that.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 18, 2016)

dilbert said:


> LDS said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...


It will happen....

BTW, I have a P/S with a 100FPS burst mode..... the fastest I have heard of is 240FPS in a P/S camera.....

Get rid of the mirror and it becomes a question of how fast you can read the sensor and how big is your buffer....


----------



## Bennymiata (Sep 19, 2016)

The fact is that most people who will buy this camera will just put the camera in Auto and snap away.
They want a camera that starts quickly is responsive and focusses fast and well. Sure they will take the odd video too, and for this sort of use, the M5 is perfect.

Geeky features are nice to have, but most buyers are scared to even delve into the menus.

I teach amateurs photography, and 90% of them don't have any idea of what the buttons on their cameras do.
The first thing I tell them is that there is no self-destruct button, as most people are scared of using any of the buttons, and a lot of people hardly even know how to play back their images on their cameras.
Going into the menus is like a black art to most people.
I get the occasional guy with a 5d3 or Nikon D810, and even they have no idea of even a quarter of their camera's capabilities.

While some M5s will be bought by pros and advanced amateurs, most are bought by mums and dads and the M5 has everything they need, and more.

Geeky reviews are great, but most reviewers forget where the volume of sales go, and they don't go to geeks.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 19, 2016)

Bennymiata said:


> The fact is that most people who will buy this camera will just put the camera in Auto and snap away.
> They want a camera that starts quickly is responsive and focusses fast and well. Sure they will take the odd video too, and for this sort of use, the M5 is perfect.
> 
> Geeky features are nice to have, but most buyers are scared to even delve into the menus.
> ...


well said!


----------



## d (Sep 19, 2016)

Bennymiata said:


> Geeky features are nice to have, but most buyers are scared to even delve into the menus.



The M5 is a *fail* - can't even load instagram on it like you can with Sony mirrorless:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/cool-hack-daniel-wood-installs-instagram-sony-a7rii/

Canon are years behind!!


----------



## dsnook (Sep 19, 2016)

Despite the rest of the article there is really only one line about halfway into the article that matters.



> In fact, despite its comparatively pedestrian feature set, given the choice, I'd take an EOS M5 out with me over a Sony Alpha any day of the week.But I really believe that this shouldn't be an either / or thing.



At the end of the day this is really what we care about, well designed, reliable, usable. That is what gets people using the gear and sells cameras. Sure, some people will buy something else because of a spec list. The point that the M5 is the option he would actually reach for shows that Canon is probably making the right decision, even if it frustrates some potential buyers.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 19, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Bennymiata said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Attitude really does make all the difference in the world sometimes.

After I dropped my 400f5.6 and found that the AF motor was wonky, the first thing I did was try to disassemble it.
It was long out of warranty so it's not like I could break anything that Canon couldn't fix at the same time anyway.


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 19, 2016)

d said:


> Bennymiata said:
> 
> 
> > Geeky features are nice to have, but most buyers are scared to even delve into the menus.
> ...



I guess you can't "install Instagram" to it but you can install an Instagram uploader to it... just like many other WiFi-equipped Canon bodies.


----------



## LDS (Sep 19, 2016)

dilbert said:


> If Canon delivered a mirrorless version of the 80D that could do 15fps, would anyone question "who is it for"?
> Or does 15fps belong to only a 1DX and 7D series camera?



How many people in the target market for such cameras routinely shoot not at 10fps or 5fps, but beyond 2fps? How many people in that target market really miss photo opportunities because the camera can't shoot fast enough? How many in that target are willingly to pay more - because it may be quite useless to be able to shoot at 15fps for only 2s - for a feature they maybe use once in their camera lifetime?

Those who need such speeds are exactly those who would buy a 1DX or 7D anyway, because they don't need speed alone, but a whole system designed for a more demanding use. And still, many perform a kind of photography which needs single shot only...

Guess we should add "SAS" - "Specs Acquisition Syndrome" to GAS... for the joy of marketing people


----------



## d (Sep 19, 2016)

Sharlin said:


> d said:
> 
> 
> > Bennymiata said:
> ...



Lol - sorry I was trying to be tongue in cheek! I don't care about uploading to social media direct from camera, though there are no doubt those who do. Didn't realise there were uploaders available - thanks for sharing.


----------



## LDS (Sep 19, 2016)

d said:


> I don't care about uploading to social media direct from camera, though there are no doubt those who do.



Just like SmartTVs, there's a not so remote risk any client on a camera will become useless as soon as the destination site "upgrades" the upload protocol and the camera client is not maintained.

So probably you'll get "features" that will become unusable in two/three years - which could be acceptable for phones that gets replaced more or less in the same period, not for a camera that should "live" far longer.


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 19, 2016)

d said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > I guess you can't "install Instagram" to it but you can install an Instagram uploader to it... just like many other WiFi-equipped Canon bodies.
> ...



Yeah, I know  Just found it particularly funny because with Canon you actually can (heh). You can register various social media accounts using the EOS Utility. To upload you need WiFi of course as the cameras don't have cellular connectivity.


----------

