# The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 8, 2013)

```
<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=13973"></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=13973">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>The next EOS M cameras


</strong>The <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/07/crazy-deal-canon-eos-m-w22mm-f2-299-at-bh/" target="_blank">recent sale for the EOS M</a> suggests Canon is dumping large inventory of the camera for a successor. I also think it’s partially to get people to finally buy into the system and that Canon is going to put more muscle behind the product line.</p>
<p>According to a <a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/mirrorless.html" target="_blank">source at NL</a>, Canon is going to introduce a “basic” EOS M 18mp successor first, and follow it up with a 20mp APS-C dual pixel model afterwards. The latter camera is said to be aimed at the “full frame Canon shooter”, and will have an optional viewfinder. This goes along with what <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/the-future-of-eos-m-cr1/" target="_blank">we’ve previously been told</a>.</p>
<p>Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## rpiotr01 (Jul 8, 2013)

They won't be $299, that's for dang sure.


----------



## cookinghusband (Jul 8, 2013)

They better have something with dual pixel soon, else not many existing eos-m user will upgrade. optional view finder is not really necessary, just give us a hdmi/usb port that work with the life view and remote.


----------



## justsomedude (Jul 8, 2013)

Heh.

I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.

I guess I was spot on with that prediction.

8)


----------



## bholliman (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> Heh.
> 
> I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.
> 
> I guess I was spot on with that prediction.



Your prediction will be spot on if this rumor is correct. I would not be surprised however.

For me, the $299 EOS-M deal is a good one regardless. I needed a decent pocket sized camera and with recent firmware upgrade, the M is now a good option, and has the advantage of using my other Canon glass. If a new M comes along it will be significantly more than $299, so I would not be interested. New bodies come along all the time, if you always wait for the next big thing you would never buy. At some point down the road, I'll upgrade all my camera bodies with newer ones that are available at the time.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> Heh.
> 
> I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.
> 
> ...



How is paying $300 for a mirrorless with DSLR IQ and a small, fast, and by all accounts, sharp prime _silly?_ That there would be an improved successor is blatantly obvious._ But you're the Man_.


----------



## hmmm (Jul 8, 2013)

"Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"

That is something you hear about more in astronomy. But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting. A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100. Count on the Canon being $300, maybe. Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections. 

Let's see -- a .8 reducer would make the 85 1.8 a 68 1.4. But the efl would still be a bit over 100mm because of the crop factor. This sounds intriguing, but will probably not be inexpensive.

A reducer factor of 0.63 would restore EF lenses to their full frame optical values. (0.63 = 1/1.6). I wonder if that's it....


----------



## Etienne (Jul 8, 2013)

Wake me up when the dual-pixel-sensor model is available


----------



## Cb33 (Jul 8, 2013)

hmmm said:


> "Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"
> 
> That is something you hear about more in astronomy. But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting. A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100. Count on the Canon being $300, maybe. Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections.
> 
> ...



The 10-22 is an EF-S lens. It looks like this would only be for EF lenses only. I think you are right on the 0.63 reducer, though. I'm excited for that. The EOS-M just gets more and more appealing.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.
> 
> I guess I was spot on with that prediction.



Sounds spot off, to me. Maybe I'm biased because I bought one for $299. But, if this rumor is true (it's CR1, just the new 100-400 has been for what, 4 years?), the next M will be an 18 MP minor update (T5i/SL1 sensor), and the 20 MP dual pixel CMOS will follow that...but when? And 'aimed at the FF Canon shooter' sounds like a $900-1000 camera, to me. So, $299 really doesn't sound 'silly' especially when the camera + 22mm pancake only costs $85 more than the 22mm pancake alone. That way, the next M can be bought with the kit zoom (since the best way to buy a kit lens is in a kit), and even selling the body for $150 you'd come out ahead... Or you'd have a cheap body for IR conversion - one almost ideally suited for it as any lens can be used. 

Just my $0.02 (or $299, as the case may be).


----------



## hmmm (Jul 8, 2013)

Cb33 said:


> hmmm said:
> 
> 
> > "Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"
> ...



Agreed -- I got to thinking about it and was about to follow up with a post saying that it likely be EF only because it would need the extra clearance. I also would like to revise my price guess: this will be marketed as a piece of pro gear -- a Canon teleconverter runs about $450 -- so that would likely be the ballpark for the reducer -- $450 - $500. I hope it's closer to the first guess, though!


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 8, 2013)

So Canon just dumped their current model at a ridiculously low price so that could introduce a very similar model?? The only reason I can see why they would do that is because they figure the current model's reputation is so bad that nobody would buy it at a higher price, so bad, in fact, that they had to incur the cost of a firmware upgrade to make it marketable even at the ridiculously low price.

I wonder if the people who decided to bring the current model to market are still working at Canon?


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 8, 2013)

hmmm said:


> Cb33 said:
> 
> 
> > hmmm said:
> ...



It isn't a matter of clearance, it's how large an image circle the lens throws onto the sensor. With an EF lens, the adapter shrinks the image from 43mm diameter to about 27.6mm. An EF-S lens already has a (nominal) image circle of 27.6mm so shouldn't be reduced more.


----------



## infared (Jul 8, 2013)

When?...When?....WHEN? Will the 20mp, VF and EF lens reducer be introduced??? Is there any word on a timeline?


----------



## abirkill (Jul 8, 2013)

I agree, something to reduce the image circle from a full-frame EF lens to match the M sensor size makes the most sense I think. This also tallies in with the suggestion in the original rumour that it will be aimed at the full-frame Canon shooter -- focal lengths would remain approximately the same.

This has certainly been one of the big reasons I haven't snapped up the current EOS-M at the bargain price -- I don't want to have to duplicate wide-angle lenses.

Am I right in thinking that such a reducer would also increase the effective light-gathering capability of a lens, as the same image will be projected on a smaller area? This would mean an f/2.8 lens could behave something like an f/2.2 lens (depending on efficiency) when mounted to the reducer (in terms of light gathering).


----------



## Budka (Jul 8, 2013)

rpiotr01 said:


> They won't be $299, that's for dang sure.



That's right. Surely the new version will cost the same what the original EOS-M Kit at launch: $ 800.
Maybe $749 because the "focusgate" bad press.


----------



## bvukich (Jul 8, 2013)

hmmm said:


> "Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"
> 
> That is something you hear about more in astronomy. But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting. A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100. Count on the Canon being $300, maybe. Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections.
> 
> ...



I would expect a factor of .707 (sqrt(2)/2) mainly because it would be an even 1 stop difference, whereas a factor of .63 comes out to a very odd 5/4ths stops.

85/1.8 would become a 60/1.3
24-70/2.8 would become 17-50/2
70-200/4 would become 50-140/2.8

I think that would be enough to make focal lengths that are only so-so on crop (24-anything) quite attractive.


----------



## FunPhotons (Jul 8, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.
> ...



I agree. The EOS M now for $299 is a steal, with the new firmware it's a highly capable camera in a small package, and it works with my existing system (flash, lenses, GPS). I've got a couple S100's which are going to probably be retired due to this camera. Sure new Mirrorless will come, who cares? I can upgrade later.


----------



## eric_ykchan (Jul 8, 2013)

A "basic" model more basic than the current EOS-M? Will Canon sell the "basic" model at USD200?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2013)

eric_ykchan said:


> A "basic" model more basic than the current EOS-M? Will Canon sell the "basic" model at USD200?



Of course not, because it'll have the NEW (to mirrorless) Hybrid CMOS II sensor (aka the T5i/SL1 sensor). Plus a new scene mode or two. :


----------



## neech7 (Jul 8, 2013)

Bob Howland said:


> hmmm said:
> 
> 
> > Cb33 said:
> ...



Exactly. EF-S lenses can never be FL reduced for EF-M because they are both APS-C. What is there to reduce when both sensors are exactly the same size?

If the FL reducer part of the rumor is true, I suspect Metabones finally got Canon to buy or license what they have to offer.

But what does that leave this video, I wonder: SpeedBooster For Eos M


----------



## unfocused (Jul 8, 2013)

Why is it that people never seem to get that retailers are not Canon and an individual retailers pricing decision often occurs independent of Canon (or any other manufacturer). 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Fact: Canon is not offering the EOS M for $299. 
Fact: There is no rebate currently offered for the EOS-M, which means no enforcement of minimum advertised pricing.
Fact: B&H offered the camera for $299.
Fact: We don't know why B&H made this offer.
Fact: Adorama and Amazon are major competitors with B&H.
Fact: Adorama and Amazon matched B&H's price.
Fact: We don't know why Adorama and Amazon matched B&H's price, but we can speculate it has something to do with the competitive marketplace.
Fact: Eventually, the EOS-M will be replaced.

Assuming any relationship between the last fact and all those preceding, without correcting for all of the other variables, is simply sloppy reasoning.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2013)

unfocused said:


> *Assuming* any relationship between the last fact and all those preceding, without correcting for all of the other variables, is simply...



Going to be done be nearly everyone because a) it's human nature, and/or b) it's just plain fun.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 8, 2013)

hmmm said:


> "Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"
> 
> That is something you hear about more in astronomy. But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting. A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100. Count on the Canon being $300, maybe. Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections.





abirkill said:


> Am I right in thinking that such a reducer would also increase the effective light-gathering capability of a lens, as the same image will be projected on a smaller area? This would mean an f/2.8 lens could behave something like an f/2.2 lens (depending on efficiency) when mounted to the reducer (in terms of light gathering).


This already exists, so, you can see what it would essentially do: http://www.metabones.com/buy-speed-booster

So, for the EF to NEX one, it makes the lens .71x wider while increasing the aperture by a stop (technically a little more). It essentially creates a full-frame approximation while using an adapter and APS-C sensor. There would be some short-comings (AF being one, I would imagine), but a great combo for landscape and video no doubt. The Metabones one is all the rage with people shooting on GH2's and GH3's

As you can see, the price is as much as a mirrorless body. Can't imagine Canon selling it as a loss-leader, so, expect it to be $5-600 if it's as good as the Metabones one.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 8, 2013)

To be able to use current EF and/or EF-S lenses is a nice feature, however, I still want *pancake lenses* to go with mirrorless cameras.


----------



## infared (Jul 8, 2013)

abirkill said:


> I agree, something to reduce the image circle from a full-frame EF lens to match the M sensor size makes the most sense I think. This also tallies in with the suggestion in the original rumour that it will be aimed at the full-frame Canon shooter -- focal lengths would remain approximately the same.
> 
> This has certainly been one of the big reasons I haven't snapped up the current EOS-M at the bargain price -- I don't want to have to duplicate wide-angle lenses.
> 
> Am I right in thinking that such a reducer would also increase the effective light-gathering capability of a lens, as the same image will be projected on a smaller area? This would mean an f/2.8 lens could behave something like an f/2.2 lens (depending on efficiency) when mounted to the reducer (in terms of light gathering).



Hopefully it will be a speed booster, i.e. reducing the effective f-stop and image circle of the lens...no?


----------



## justsomedude (Jul 8, 2013)

brad-man said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > Heh.
> ...



In my opinion the EOS-M is not worthy of its price tag due to its poor AF, even at $299. Opinions vary. And people can buy in to first generation gear; it's their money - their choice. They know the risks going in. And when there's a fire sale, it's pretty telling that the new technology (ie, dual-pixel AF) just made the previous generation obsolete.

Don't be mad. 

:-[


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jul 8, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> To be able to use current EF and/or EF-S lenses is a nice feature, however, I still want *pancake lenses* to go with mirrorless cameras.



+1... being able to attach you EF/Ef-S lenses to it is great indeed, and a feature that was required, but equally (or more so) is the need for smaller, lighter lenses to go with the smaller lighter body... I want a pancake feast... preferably EF!!!  Bring out pancakes at all the physically available focus lengths, no matter how odd (40mm wasn't exactly normal)!


----------



## kennephoto (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > justsomedude said:
> ...



Cheaper than my 600$ iPhone, more portable than a 5d that's why I bought one. I can make decent photos with an iPhone and better ones with a 5d but I get nervous walking around with my 5d I won't cry as much if my 300 dollar camera gets stolen. So congrats to the happy people that got a great deal on a great camera!


----------



## dswtan (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> In my opinion the EOS-M is not worthy of its price tag due to its poor AF


Did you miss the whole firmware upgrade news recently perhaps, fixing the AF?
http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/the-new-eos-m-firmware-coming-soon/


----------



## pwp (Jul 8, 2013)

The 20mpx dual sensor flagship model with EVF sound like the camera made just for me! 
I'll have one with a 20mm pancake please...

-PW


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2013)

pwp said:


> The 20mpx dual sensor flagship model with EVF sound like the camera made just for me!
> I'll have one with a 20mm pancake please...



Sure, that'll be $1,200.00, please...


----------



## eos650 (Jul 8, 2013)

A one stop focal length reducer would create some really interesting effective lenses. I'm thinking a one stop focal length reducer would be the opposite of a 1.4X teleconverter. If so, I come up with the following, assuming my math is correct.

*85mm f1.2 would become a 60.7mm f0.86.*

Here is my math...
85mm / 1.4 = 60.71mm

f-Stop = f/d (f-Stop = focal length / diameter). Solve for 'd':
1.2 = 85/d
1.2d = 85
d = 85/1.2
d = 70.83

Plug in the new focal length. I expect the diameter would remain the same since it's the diameter at the front of the lens:

f-Stop = 60.71 / 70.83

f-stop = .857


----------



## JohanCruyff (Jul 8, 2013)

bvukich said:


> hmmm said:
> 
> 
> > "Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"
> ...




...and the 60/1.3 would become a 85/1.8 equivalent,
the 17-50/2 would become a 24-70/2.8 equivalent,
the 50-140/2.8 would become a 70-200/4 equivalent,
on a crop body.


----------



## bvukich (Jul 8, 2013)

eos650 said:


> A one stop focal length reducer would create some really interesting effective lenses. I'm thinking a one stop focal length reducer would be the opposite of a 1.4X teleconverter. If so, I come up with the following, assuming my math is correct.
> 
> *85mm f1.2 would become a 60.7mm f0.86.*
> 
> ...



Your answer is pretty close (one stop faster than 1.2 is .84), the math is actually quite a bit more complicated though.

Actual formula:

sqrt(2)^((log(*OLDF*)/log(sqrt(2))+*CHANGE*)

Since OLDF = 1.2 (actually it's sqrt(2)^.5 if you want exact numbers, or approx 1.18920711500272)
And CHANGE = -1

sqrt(2)^((log(1.2)/log(sqrt(2))-1) =~ 0.848528137423857
or
sqrt(2)^((log(sqrt(2)^.5)/log(sqrt(2))-1)) =~ 0.840896415253714


----------



## bvukich (Jul 8, 2013)

JohanCruyff said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > hmmm said:
> ...



Not quite
The 85/1.8 converted to 60/1.3 would behave like a 96/1.3 instead of a 128/1.8 if unconverted
The 24-70/2.8 converted to 17-50/2 would behave like a 27-80/2 instead of a 38-112/2.8 if unconverted
And the 70-200/4 converted to 50-140/2.8 would behave like a 80-224/2.8 instead of a 112-320/4 if unconverted

Obviously all these numbers are with a .707 conversion factor, which is just my guess, and a 1.6 crop factor.

Also , when I say "behave", I'm talking about FOV and exposure. DOF/bokeh/etc., not included.


----------



## rs (Jul 8, 2013)

bvukich said:


> eos650 said:
> 
> 
> > A one stop focal length reducer would create some really interesting effective lenses. I'm thinking a one stop focal length reducer would be the opposite of a 1.4X teleconverter. If so, I come up with the following, assuming my math is correct.
> ...


However, if Canon want to retain the same field of view, depth of field and light gathering capabilities that EF lenses enjoy on FF, they'll need to develop a 1.6x telecompressor instead of a 1.4x. That would make an EF 85/1.2 into an EF-M 53/0.74 lens.

Lets hope that an EF lens, telecompressor and dual pixel AF sensor combine to make a quick and accurate AF system, as well as good image quality.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Jul 8, 2013)

I think it's a sweet camera with the firmware upgrade. I really wish I didn't have to use an adapter to use my EF lenses. But at least I can use them with the camera. Better than a P.S., smaller and cheaper than a DSLR. Almost as capable.

If I had the cash, I would've seriously considered the EOS M. Definitely good gear.


----------



## bvukich (Jul 8, 2013)

rs said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > eos650 said:
> ...



I just reran the numbers starting with image circle sizes (43.2mm & 27.3mm) and working from there, and my original calculation of 5/4ths stop is a bit off now, and it is actually pretty damn close to 4/3rds stops (-1.32426072248723) which would be a very convenient factor (except for the goofy 1/6th stops you get when going from a half stop like 1.2, but that really only affects two lenses).

That would make an 85/1.2 convert to a 54(53.7)/.75(.749) that behaves like a an 85/.75 on crop. Yes please ;D


----------



## Fleetie (Jul 8, 2013)

bvukich said:


> I just reran the numbers starting with image circle sizes (43.2mm & 27.3mm) and working from there, and my original calculation of 5/4ths stop is a bit off now, and it is actually pretty damn close to 4/3rds stops (-1.32426072248723) which would be a very convenient factor (except for the goofy 1/6th stops you get when going from a half stop like 1.2, but that really only affects two lenses).
> 
> That would make an 85/1.2 convert to a 54(53.7)/.75(.749) that behaves like a an 85/.75 on crop. Yes please ;D


So the focal length is effectively unchanged at 85mm? Even though you're dividing it by sqrt(2) and multiplying it by 1.6 (for crop)?


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> In my opinion the EOS-M is not worthy of its price tag due to its poor AF, even at $299. Opinions vary. And people can buy in to first generation gear; it's their money - their choice. They know the risks going in. And when there's a fire sale, it's pretty telling that the new technology (ie, dual-pixel AF) just made the previous generation obsolete.



You are spot on. I picked up my M last night and realised that it didn't have dual pixel AF. I cried. I gave it a viking burial. I think my 7D and 600D are going to get it next. 

Obsolete is in the dictionary. Look it up.


----------



## NormanBates (Jul 8, 2013)

The easiest way to think of what a speedbooster does to your sensor size and focal length is the following:

When you don't use a speedbooster, you constantly multiply your focal lengths by 1.6 to get the "equivalent focal length". With a speedbooster that is no longer necessary.

WITH A SPEEDBOOSTER, YOUR APS-C CAMERA JUST BECAME A FULLFRAME CAMERA, AND ISO IS ACTUALLY TWICE AS HIGH AS WHAT THE CAMERA SAYS

So, when I use a 50mm on my NEX-5N with a speedbooster, set at f/1.4 and with ISO 200, I get an image with the same field of view, depth of field, and exposure, as I'd get with that same 50mm on a 5D3, set at f/1.4 and with ISO 400.
There, no more math. It becomes a FF camera, end of story.


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> Heh.
> 
> I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.
> 
> ...



Yes and no - the lens alone is roughly 200 $ / EUR - so you get a fully functional body with battery for 100 bucks! I would be happy if I would see this offer in germany. And I think a dual pixel AF version will be offered as body only version!


----------



## Etienne (Jul 8, 2013)

NormanBates said:


> The easiest way to think of what a speedbooster does to your sensor size and focal length is the following:
> 
> When you don't use a speedbooster, you constantly multiply your focal lengths by 1.6 to get the "equivalent focal length". With a speedbooster that is no longer necessary.
> 
> ...



You should get an additional 1 1/3 stops of light. If Canon makes it, I imagine they would compensate by making f-stop read accurately... so that the camera would see f/1.8 instead of f/2.8, for example.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 8, 2013)

Firmware sounds like it has improved things in AF for Video and stills which is good and good news that the next generation models to have the technology of Dual Cmos AF from the 700D which will elevate it to fingers cross one of the best AF in terms of speed; lock on in the target; % of keeps in the Mirrorless market

Hopefully Canon will introduce models like that like to that of the Sony equivalents; Nex-5, Nex-6 and hopefully Aps and FF Nex-7 (using the excellent 6D/ 5D Sensor) - possibly doing a VG100 Camcorder line 2 and hopefully price is competitive and not over the top.

The AF systems Canon brought out like in the 5D is certainly better than the Nikon D800 and Sony A-99 - which is exciting news that Canon is getting serious (less complacent) and hopefully on top again.

One area that does need work is the lens selection in the Eos-Mount however the EF adapter is good price and excellent adapter that allows you to use any of the excellent Eos lenses.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Jul 8, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> and follow it up with a 20mp APS-C dual pixel model afterwards. The latter camera is said to be aimed at the “full frame Canon shooter”, and will have an optional viewfinder.


That is some very good news ... Hope they will also announce some pancake prime lenses.


----------



## pedro (Jul 8, 2013)

hmmm said:


> "Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"
> 
> That is something you hear about more in astronomy. But a 0.8 focal reducer that would turn your 10-22 3.5-4.5 into, say, a 8-18 2.8 - 3.6 would be interesting. A Meade or Celestron focal reducer costs in the neighborhood of $100. Count on the Canon being $300, maybe. Because it is Canon, and because it has the EOS electronic connections.
> 
> ...



Intresting post. Never read about that before. Is there such a thing for Crop DSLRs? And I wonder how similar tech would work on my 5DIII and the 16-35 2.8 USM II 8)


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 8, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Why is it that people never seem to get that retailers are not Canon and an individual retailers pricing decision often occurs independent of Canon (or any other manufacturer).
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc
> 
> ...


Have you ever investigated "dealer incentives" that car manufacturers offer to their dealers? The price reduction could have come about because Canon let it be known to its retailers that it had a warehouse full of M kits that it was willing to sell to them (the retailers) at a much lower price and B&H, being B&H, was the first retailer to reduce their price in response. _Dealers don't typically sell stuff at a loss without good reason, even if their competitors decide to._ Even if the M is being replaced, the retailers could simply hold onto their current kits and reduce their prices to the break-even point when the new model appears. Given Canon's pricing history, that break-even point is likely to be well below the price of the new models' kits.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 8, 2013)

Etienne said:


> NormanBates said:
> 
> 
> > The easiest way to think of what a speedbooster does to your sensor size and focal length is the following:
> ...



Using the booster with the 50 f/1.2 or 85 f/1.2 might prove interesting. The resulting maximum aperture would be something like f/.75. I suspect that the corners would be a bit ragged.


----------



## Tom W (Jul 8, 2013)

It'll be interesting to see how the 70D technology pans out. It looks like the AF capability is good. If this is applied to a new M class body, and if this new focal length "reducer" comes to fruition, this could be a versatile addition to the kit for someone that's already packing a good amount of EOS glass.


----------



## djrocks66 (Jul 8, 2013)

Just picked up the M. Couldn't resist that deal. It came with the newer firmware so I'm thinking maybe Canon pushing out the stock? Anyway. It is a pretty cool little camera that delivers great results. I am quite happy with the image output . I can live with the slower autofocus for what this camera is. The 22mm lens is sharp and contrasty. The touch screen works very good. I have a Fuji X20 that I bought as a carry around camera mainly because of the view finder. I think I might sell it now. Even though the M doesn't have a viewfinder or flash you just can't compare the image quality with the higher end point and shoots. The next M should be a good one. If they manage to get a small flash with a viewfinder and improve the AF it will be a winner. I am happy though with this little guy.


----------



## Pi (Jul 8, 2013)

hmmm said:


> "Also in development is a focal length reducer for EF lenses, this will be announced with the 20mp EOS M camera"



Once you start putting adapters and reducers on a compact body, it starts to lose appeal to me. I'd rather use my FF.


----------



## Zv (Jul 8, 2013)

So will this reducer work with the current EOS M ya think? That could be interesting. 

I would also be interested in a EFM 50mm lens to go with my 22.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (Jul 8, 2013)

*Re: The Next EOS M - features*

I'm less concerned about the sensor than I am about GPS, WiFi, small pop up flash and a tiltable rear screen. THese are the reasons I didn't jump on the $299 offer. Great price, but without these it no more useful than the G1X I already have.

I don't need a viewfinder. Between parallax and small image size, they are just a hassle. But I would love to use it at waist or chest level with a tilting screen. Doesn't have to swivel. 

A sensor bump is nice to have and inevitable, but without the other features, I won't.


----------



## rs (Jul 8, 2013)

NormanBates said:


> The easiest way to think of what a speedbooster does to your sensor size and focal length is the following:
> 
> When you don't use a speedbooster, you constantly multiply your focal lengths by 1.6 to get the "equivalent focal length". With a speedbooster that is no longer necessary.
> 
> ...


That's the exact way Nikon did it with its E series DSLR's. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_E_series). Built in 4x telecompressor, with a sensor to match. The tiny sensor started at ISO 50, but the camera instead called it ISO 800 so it could report the lenses aperture and focal length in 35mm units.

I don't know whether Canon will do it that way (which in many ways makes the most sense), or let it report these compressed imaging circles with their brighter f numbers and shorter focal lengths instead. 

I'm guessing this whole telecompressor thing is a stepping stone to Canon fitting a FF sensor in an EOS-M sized body. If they believe there's a market for people to mount FF glass on a mirrorless, why not make the body/adapter smaller and optically better by fitting a bigger sensor in leu of the glass - and then native wide angle FF glass can be made to take advantage of the shorter flange distance. If a crop dual pixel sensor is possible, so is a FF version.


----------



## Pi (Jul 8, 2013)

*Re: The Next EOS M - features*



UrbanVoyeur said:


> A sensor bump is nice to have and inevitable, but without the other features, I won't.



Like IBIS. The m43 system has it.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 8, 2013)

By the way, here is an actual test of the FS100 vs the 5D3, one using the Speedbooster and the other using the traditional full-frame sensor. Pretty interesting piece of technology for sure. Most of the benefits of a full-frame camera for less demanding applications (landscape, video, portrait), and you still have an APS-C camera without it for wildlife, sports, etc

https://vimeo.com/57901943


----------



## bvukich (Jul 8, 2013)

Fleetie said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > I just reran the numbers starting with image circle sizes (43.2mm & 27.3mm) and working from there, and my original calculation of 5/4ths stop is a bit off now, and it is actually pretty damn close to 4/3rds stops (-1.32426072248723) which would be a very convenient factor (except for the goofy 1/6th stops you get when going from a half stop like 1.2, but that really only affects two lenses).
> ...



Sorry, it was late and I didn't explain myself very well.

The numbers work out perfect like that if you use 27.3/43.2 (~0.6319) as the factor for the converter, then the actual APSC crop factor is 43.2/27.3 (~1.5824) on Canon which perfectly reverses the apparent focal length change because they are reciprocals.

That was essentially the factor that was initially speculated by hmmm. I argued .707 made more sense, but really either would work fine.


----------



## Etienne (Jul 8, 2013)

BTW ... 

How about focus peaking and a swivel screen ?


----------



## CANONisOK (Jul 8, 2013)

Pi said:


> Once you start putting adapters and reducers on a compact body, it starts to lose appeal to me. I'd rather use my FF.



Beat me to it. While the FL reducer is a nifty "trick" it eliminates the inherent advantage (mainly, size) of a standalone compact mirrorless system. Of the flipside, it probably makes the EOS M an even better backup without taking up much room in the kit bag - as the performance should more closely approximate your FF setup.

My personal preference is that Canon adds more fast primes to the EF-M lineup.



rs said:


> I'm guessing this whole telecompressor thing is a stepping stone to Canon fitting a FF sensor in an EOS-M sized body. If they believe there's a market for people to mount FF glass on a mirrorless, why not make the body/adapter smaller and optically better by fitting a bigger sensor in leu of the glass - and then native wide angle FF glass can be made to take advantage of the shorter flange distance. If a crop dual pixel sensor is possible, so is a FF version.



If your proposed system allowed EF lenses to be mounted at a shorter flange distance, wouldn't it require sensors larger than our FF sensors? Sounds like a challenging and expensive proposition! Not an unwelcome one though.


----------



## rs (Jul 8, 2013)

Etienne said:


> BTW ...
> 
> How about focus peaking and a swivel screen ?


With on chip PDAF covering the whole area, I see no reason why canon couldn't do on-screen split focus, as Fuji have implemented with the X100S. But with Canons resistance so far to implement focus peaking, I'm guessing neither will appear anytime soon


----------



## neech7 (Jul 8, 2013)

rs said:


> I'm guessing this whole telecompressor thing is a stepping stone to Canon fitting a FF sensor in an EOS-M sized body. If they believe there's a market for people to mount FF glass on a mirrorless, why not make the body/adapter smaller and optically better by fitting a bigger sensor in leu of the glass - and then native wide angle FF glass can be made to take advantage of the shorter flange distance. If a crop dual pixel sensor is possible, so is a FF version.



That would require a new mount, because APS-C is the biggest that can fit the EOS-M.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2013)

neech7 said:


> That would require a new mount, because APS-C is the biggest that can fit the EOS-M.



???

The EF and EF-S mount are the same size...


----------



## neech7 (Jul 8, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> neech7 said:
> 
> 
> > That would require a new mount, because APS-C is the biggest that can fit the EOS-M.
> ...



He's talking about stuffing a FF sensor into EF-M, whose diameter is smaller than EF/EF-S. The EF-M is optimized for APS-C, just like EF is optimized for FF. EF-S is a compromise because it has the bulk of the EF with a smaller imaging circle.


----------



## rs (Jul 8, 2013)

CANONisOK said:


> rs said:
> 
> 
> > I'm guessing this whole telecompressor thing is a stepping stone to Canon fitting a FF sensor in an EOS-M sized body. If they believe there's a market for people to mount FF glass on a mirrorless, why not make the body/adapter smaller and optically better by fitting a bigger sensor in leu of the glass - and then native wide angle FF glass can be made to take advantage of the shorter flange distance. If a crop dual pixel sensor is possible, so is a FF version.
> ...


I was thinking of using a glass-free tube, much like the current EF to EF-M adapter to use FF glass on a FF sensor and retain the normal focus range. Focal lengths above about 40mm can't really be made smaller with a reduction in the flange distance (just look at the shorty forty), so just use EF glass with a tube adapter. But the EF-M flange distance lends itself well to shorter lenses such as 22mm pancakes. There's little reason why a similar sized 22mm pancake couldn't have a larger imaging circle for FF. That would make it more compact than even a crop M for wide angle.


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 8, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.
> ...



Spot on. I bought one, too- $299 for an APS-C sensor w/an ultra-compact 35mm equivalent pancake that w/an adapter can take all of my EF lenses is a great deal. Also, I'm a video shooter and not having to get the shutter out of the way everytime you shoot video is a wonderful feature- a great backup for my 5Dii.


----------



## CANONisOK (Jul 8, 2013)

rs said:


> CANONisOK said:
> 
> 
> > rs said:
> ...


Thanks for the clarification! I can see where you're going with this. Following this down its logical path, if Canon released this FF compact which requires an adapter for EF lenses, do you think they'd release a new lens mount for direct mounting to the on-camera flange? I guess it wouldn't be much different than their current EF/EF-S systems, but I'd be surprised to see them have two mirrorless lens systems out there.


----------



## justsomedude (Jul 8, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > In my opinion the EOS-M is not worthy of its price tag due to its poor AF, even at $299. Opinions vary. And people can buy in to first generation gear; it's their money - their choice. They know the risks going in. And when there's a fire sale, it's pretty telling that the new technology (ie, dual-pixel AF) just made the previous generation obsolete.
> ...



Are you being cute? I can't tell.

Obsolete: Out of date. No longer current.

The dual-pixel AF system launched on the 70D single-handedly restructured Canon's line that is based around Live-View focusing. And, in case you are unaware, the EOS-M line is the only one based around Live-View focusing.

Do you really not find it curious that there's a $299 fire sale on the EOS-M, and then hours later rumors drop of a replacement in the works? 

You may want to look up naive... it's in the dictionary too.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> The dual-pixel AF system launched on the 70D single-handedly *restructured* Canon's line that is based around Live-View focusing. And, in case you are unaware, the EOS-M line is the only one based around Live-View focusing.



You're using the past tense. I do not think the restructuring you think has happened has actually happened. In fact, if you read the rumor that 'dropped just hours after a fire sale' you'll see that, according to that rumor, Canon intends to release another M camera before dual pixel CMOS 'restructures' anything about the M series. 



justsomedude said:


> And, in case you are unaware, the EOS-M line is the only one based around Live-View focusing.



So apparently, you are unaware of the PowerShot G1 X, not to mention the other PowerShots with CMOS sensors.


----------



## distant.star (Jul 8, 2013)

.
I, for one, fully comprehend manufacturer/retailer relationships.

However, I'll never believe Canon does not have some hand in this particular move. To think B&H suddenly got a wild hair up their tookus one day and fire-saled the M and then their competition followed the piper like mice is far too improbable.

This is why I initially said I'm scratching my head trying to understand this. There is something behind it -- and I know all (or some at least) will be revealed in time.

Meanwhile, while I think it would be delightful to have the M right now, I'm not taking the bait. For me, it won't get me any pictures I can't get with my current equipment.

No offense intended to anyone who bought into this deal. I think that's great for you if you need it or just want it. And I'll be listening to hear your experiences with it -- so far I've heard nothing but good things. Thanks.






unfocused said:


> Why is it that people never seem to get that retailers are not Canon and an individual retailers pricing decision often occurs independent of Canon (or any other manufacturer).
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc
> 
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Fact: Canon is not offering the EOS M for $299.
> Fact: There is no rebate currently offered for the EOS-M, which means no enforcement of minimum advertised pricing.
> Fact: B&H offered the camera for $299.
> Fact: We don't know why B&H made this offer.
> ...



Fact: B&H, Adorama, and Amazon offered a very low price on the EOS M
Speculation: Canon had a large backstock of EOS M kits
Speculation: Canon offered discount wholesale pricing to a select group of their largest US retailers
Speculation: The discount pricing was based on retailers' purchase of a large number of units
Speculation: Canon did this to drive wider adoption of the EOS M system
Fact: I bought one, it's been delivered to my building and I'll have my hands on it within the hour


----------



## CANONisOK (Jul 8, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Fact: I bought one, it's been delivered to my building and I'll have my hands on it within the hour


Fact: You got it for a great price.
Fact: I, for one, think it's a great little camera (even before the firmware update). 
Speculation: Being an advanced user, you will find it to be a great camera with intuitive controls, a small footprint, and great IQ considering the size of the package.
Speculation: You will like it.


----------



## justsomedude (Jul 8, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > The dual-pixel AF system launched on the 70D single-handedly *restructured* Canon's line that is based around Live-View focusing. And, in case you are unaware, the EOS-M line is the only one based around Live-View focusing.
> ...



I'm also unaware of my stinky feet... but my girlfriend continues to complain about them. 

Actually, I just don't understand all of the projecting that takes place on these forums. I state my opinion that I think the current EOS-M is a bad buy, and you'd think I just insulted some one's mother... at her funeral.

Why does everyone care so much about what others think of how they choose to spend their money?

I still think the EOS-M is a bad buy. And no amount of sarcastic responses, or jabs at my knowledge of the word "obsolete" will change that fact. Cripes. Take the camera out and have fun... really... WHO CARES????????


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> Actually, I just don't understand all of the projecting that takes place on these forums. I state my opinion that I think the current EOS-M is a bad buy...



At a guess, I'd say it was because the word you used was 'silly'...being called silly (and yes, I know that's not what you stated, but that's a natural interpretation) tends to piss people off.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Jul 8, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> I state my opinion that I think the current EOS-M is a bad buy, and you'd think I just insulted some one's mother... at her funeral.


Simple solution, don't make them think you "just insulted some one's mother... at her funeral" ;D
But we get it, you don't like EOS-M and you don't want to buy it at $299 or at any other price... thanks for letting us know. :


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jul 8, 2013)

Fact: Rumo(u)rs are not fact.


----------



## Mantanuska (Jul 9, 2013)

Seems more likely any new M body will have dual pixel AF


----------



## expatinasia (Jul 9, 2013)

distant.star said:


> I, for one, fully comprehend manufacturer/retailer relationships. However, I'll never believe Canon does not have some hand in this particular move. To think B&H suddenly got a wild hair up their tookus one day and fire-saled the M and then their competition followed the piper like mice is far too improbable. This is why I initially said I'm scratching my head trying to understand this. There is something behind it -- and I know all (or some at least) will be revealed in time.
> 
> Meanwhile, while I think it would be delightful to have the M right now, I'm not taking the bait. For me, it won't get me any pictures I can't get with my current equipment.



+1 

I was quite surprised by how many people came out and, at least publicly, said they were buying the M camera, either to keep, sell on later, or some other reason. It was almost as if everyone had US$300 burning a hole in their pocket which they just had to get rid of.

Sure the new M is likely to be more expensive, but then it is also likely to be better.

Look at the much more costly - some say much higher IQ - RX 100. Sony has just come out with the RX 100 ii which addresses some of the main issues customers had with version one. It is a little more expensive than v1 but many would be happy to pay that extra for improved performance.

I have never been impressed with the M, and I was not even aware you needed a mount, a this and a that. The whole point of these small things is that you stick it in your pocket and not worry about which bits you have left at home. 

I will look at the M ii when it comes out, but until then, I do not care if the M I is US$ 100, I still won't buy it.


----------



## gmrza (Jul 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > I just posted a few hours ago in the $299 EOS thread that it seemed like a silly purchase; since Canon would likely be replacing it with a dual-pixel AF markII version.
> ...



Can't fault that logic. I like the idea of IR conversion, since fast AF performance is usually not a factor for IR, since the main use of IR is for landscapes.

Hmm, I'm now wondering what B&H will charge to ship an EOS-M Down Under.....


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 9, 2013)

Why are they fire saleing them? It seems obvious to me, these kinds of cameras are set up on one production line and they have a production run of one. Once the M II comes out they won't even sell for $299 because everybody will want the new one. Canon have to get rid of the backlogged inventory or they write it off, at the moment I suspect they have the MII boxed up and ready to ship but are holding back to get ride of as many M's as they can.

Why would anybody buy one? Well it seems to me only a fool wouldn't. This is a fully compatible post 2012 APS-C sensored EOS camera, the perfect backup, or backup of your backup, depending on how anal you are. It shoots video, it uses your current lenses, it takes up practically no space or weight. It is fully functional in Group Mode with the RT flash system, the list of practical features goes on and on. Will the M II be "better"? Of course, but it won't be $299 unless Canon mess up on the stocking again and even then not for a year, and now they have the M nearly out of the way I am sure they have a much better feel for the M II market quantities.

At $299 with a decent 35mm f2.8 (equivalent) I can't see a down side to this camera bearing in mind the functionality and system integration. I was looking at the Fuji X100s or the EOS-M as a smaller camera, at less than 25% of the price for a much more useful (for us Canon shooters) interchangeable lens body the M seems like a no brainer.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 9, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> I, for one, fully comprehend manufacturer/retailer relationships.
> 
> However, I'll never believe Canon does not have some hand in this particular move. To think B&H suddenly got a wild hair up their tookus one day and fire-saled the M and then their competition followed the piper like mice is far too improbable...



Oh, I absolutely agree. I strongly suspect that EOS-M sales have been disappointing and it's highly likely that Canon offered it's dealers some special pricing if they purchased large quantities of the camera. It's entirely possible that B&H's sales rep cut them a special deal if they took a bunch of EOS-Ms off his or her hands. Given that Adorama and Amazon ran out of stock quickly after price-matching B&H makes me think they weren't planning on the fire sale at B&H.

Anyway, my point – perhaps not make clearly – was that too many people equate a retailer's actions with the actions of Canon and vice versa. And, my other point, was that people too often assume that sales by individual retailers are a reliable predictor of new camera introductions when there are dozens of other equally plausible explanations.


----------



## TheBadger (Jul 9, 2013)

Mirrorless, advanced AF, fullframe with optical viewfinder... Those are melody to my ears!! 8) 8)


----------



## gngan (Jul 9, 2013)

unfocused said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...



It is normal that distributors get discount by buying large quantities of product from companies but that is because how business works. Canon (many other companies) distribute their product to others so they do not need to bare the risk of over stacking their products. I think distributors are very good indicator for new product or life-cycle of a product. There are several explanation to this: 
1)	Canon maybe wanting to push their product
2)	Clearing inventories for new products
3)	Too many inventories
4)	Annual report? So selling more makes it look good
If you look at Apple then most of the time the shortage of products means it’s ending its life-cycle or discontinue of the product.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 9, 2013)

TheBadger said:


> Mirrorless, advanced AF, fullframe with optical viewfinder... Those are melody to my ears!! 8) 8)



And impossible. Have you actually looked at the mount if an M? It is not possible to fit a larger sensor, the M series will stay APS-C for ever.


----------



## JoeDavid (Jul 9, 2013)

Of course Canon USA is dumping these cameras. Even BestBuy has it for $299! The thing to worry about in the States is whether or not Canon USA is getting out of the M business. They chose to not introduce the EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM lens in the USA. That was a Canon USA decision (they replied to a post on their forum concerning the lens...).


----------



## Zv (Jul 9, 2013)

JoeDavid said:


> Of course Canon USA is dumping these cameras. Even BestBuy has it for $299! The thing to worry about in the States is whether or not Canon USA is getting out of the M business. They chose to not introduce the EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM lens in the USA. That was a Canon USA decision (they replied to a post on their forum concerning the lens...).



The 11-22mm is available for pre order in Japan. Shame you guys can't get it in the states. That seems like a poor decision by Canon USA. Especially since now more people have the EOS M from this sale.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 9, 2013)

Zv said:


> The 11-22mm is available for pre order in Japan. Shame you guys can't get it in the states. That seems like a poor decision by Canon USA. Especially since *now more people have the EOS M from this sale*.



I hope that means they decide to launch the lens here!


----------



## Ivar (Jul 9, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I strongly suspect that EOS-M sales have been disappointing



As there is no other plausible explanation for such a price cut I agree.

Interesting though how much Canon has learned from this i.e. how much crippled the next M will be. 

What concerns the dual pixel system I take it for granted for the next M: 
1) new technology is what helps to sell products 
2) it is not really such a big difference, still far cry from PDAF so it doesn't add extra competition 
3) most probably the technology has even bigger potential in the next iteration so the 70D version of this technology will not last too long 

All that said I still don't have much interest in Canon cameras, there are much more interesting alternatives for my preferences. Only sound innovation could change that.


----------



## neech7 (Jul 9, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> TheBadger said:
> 
> 
> > Mirrorless, advanced AF, fullframe with optical viewfinder... Those are melody to my ears!! 8) 8)
> ...



I pointed that out on the forums but were ignored as folks continue to fantasize with no regard for common sense.


----------



## Zv (Jul 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > The 11-22mm is available for pre order in Japan. Shame you guys can't get it in the states. That seems like a poor decision by Canon USA. Especially since *now more people have the EOS M from this sale*.
> ...



If you really really want it, I could ship it over. Just pay for lens and the p&p!  (terms and conditions apply, limited one time offer)


----------



## neech7 (Jul 9, 2013)

Zv said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Zv said:
> ...



Thanks for your offer. US buyers also have the option of buying online from Canada:

http://www.henrys.com/78480-CANON-EF-M-11-22MM-F4-5-6-IS-STM-LENS.aspx

or

http://www.vistek.ca/store/CameraLenses/269981/canon-efm1122mm-f456-stm.aspx


----------



## Zv (Jul 9, 2013)

neech7 said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Wait .... It's gonna be available in Canada but not the US??


----------



## neech7 (Jul 9, 2013)

Zv said:


> neech7 said:
> 
> 
> > Zv said:
> ...



Sure looks that way. Someone mentioned that it may be an indication that Canon USA is bowing out of the mirrorless market. We'll see.


----------



## Swphoto (Jul 9, 2013)

I'm not sure why anyone thought the retailers were doing this on their own, but the B&H invoice included in the box with my M shows a manufacturer's instant rebate of $300 through today.


----------



## justsomedude (Jul 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> justsomedude said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, I just don't understand all of the projecting that takes place on these forums. I state my opinion that I think the current EOS-M is a bad buy...
> ...



Seriously? I mean... REALLY?

I think a LOT of things are silly purchases. But now you want me to temper an opinion because you're essentially saying the entire photography community is thin-skinned, can't handle dissent, and has poor (or absolutely zero) anger management skills?

That's quite an assessment!!!

"Piss people off"???? Is this the 4th grade? Where am I?????????????

I'm just completely baffled by your post.


----------



## Rick (Jul 9, 2013)

Would have been nice if this article had appeared at the bottom of the near-breathless article announcing the price reductions. After seeing the price reduction article here on CR, I placed my order with Adorama. This company doesn't do the best job of marking product items as being out of stock. On several recent orders, I have found out about OOS items throiugh a subsequent email.

By now, I am sure most of the following is not news on a 7 page discussion, but I went to the Adorama site today and searched for the EOS M camera and the site is reporting the product as "We are sorry, this item is no longer available". I called Customer Service to determine whether I needed to cancel the order and return the adapter and was told that anyone who had ordered an EOS M before the end of the sale will get one but this item is no longer available for new sales. 

Sorry if this post replicates information already posted. Just keep moving on then.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jul 9, 2013)

neech7 said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > neech7 said:
> ...



Also, In Canada the EOS M kit with the 22mm includes the flash, but for $499.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 9, 2013)

Rick said:


> Would have been nice if this article had appeared at the bottom of the near-breathless article announcing the price reductions. After seeing the price reduction article here on CR, I placed my order with Adorama. This company doesn't do the best job of marking product items as being out of stock. On several recent orders, I have found out about OOS items throiugh a subsequent email.
> 
> By now, I am sure most of the following is not news on a 7 page discussion, but I went to the Adorama site today and searched for the EOS M camera and the site is reporting the product as "We are sorry, this item is no longer available". I called Customer Service to determine whether I needed to cancel the order and return the adapter and was told that anyone who had ordered an EOS M before the end of the sale will get one but this item is no longer available for new sales.
> 
> Sorry if this post replicates information already posted. Just keep moving on then.



At this price, these cameras are moving. A good place to check is http://www.canonpricewatch.com/ . It's not always up to date either, but it will give you a good idea of who has what for how much. Adorama is presently out, but I believe you can order a backordered one from B&H. Today is listed as the last day of this sale, so if you want one you better jump. Mine is being delivered thursday...


----------



## JimS (Jul 9, 2013)

*B&H Photo showing the white EOS M as "Discontinued"*

I ordered a White model w/ 22mm lens on July 5 at which time they were out of stock, but expecting delivery later this month. My order status says "On order". 

Checking B&H's website for this model:

"This item has been discontinued by the manufacturer and is no longer available." http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/883487-REG/Canon_EOS_M_Digital_Camera_with.html

B&H said that my order should be OK since I had not received an e-mail. B&H still has the black model with 18-55mm in stock and the black model with 22mm backordered until July 18.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 10, 2013)

justsomedude said:


> Seriously? I mean... REALLY?
> ...
> Where am I???????????
> ...
> I'm just completely baffled by your post.



You're posting on the Internet, where all people see are the words you write, with no way to convey tone or intent.

It's baffling to me that many people fail to consider the implications of their words, and are surprised when others are offended.


----------



## samkatz (Jul 11, 2013)

Got my EOS -M 22mm kit from B&H today(ordered the day the sale started).

Will take a slight "learning curve" after using only the D- and Rebel series for 10 years, don't shoot in "live view" much.......

First impressions: +very solid build, no autofocus problems (S/W 2.02), IQ very close to 60D(no surprise),haven't had a lens this fast since my Canon AE 1 Program 50MM 1.8

- controls not very intuitive to me(which is why I love the D series buttons)
- feels strangely heavy, even though it's light...sounds like an oxymoron, but the footprint is tiny, so the weight is concentrated in a small area.
-flash I bought (small sunpak unit) really has lousy coverage.

I bought this on a whim as something I can keep with me as a second kit at all times, eg if I'm carrying my bird photography kit and want to grab a wider landscape or snapshot. Have been using my Samsung Galaxy for that, which is great if you just want to post on FB, but now I won't have to sacrifice an IQ should I want to really work with the images, print etc.

Whatever Canon's motivation for clearing these out at low price(assuming they cut wholesale price), I think they may have gotten the M-series in the hands of many of us who were not going there otherwise. If I really get used to this, I'd add a short zoom, and down the road maybe the EOS MII, M&M or whatever they call it.


----------



## JimS (Jul 11, 2013)

*B&H wrote saying they won't be able to fill all back orders for the EOS M*

I had a Live Chat with a sales rep yesterday about the White EOS-M I had ordered July 5. He said that my order would be fulfilled but B&H would not be able to fill some of the orders made after that date. B&H still taking orders for the black model with the 18-55mm lens (in stock) and the black model w/ the 22mm lens (back-ordered until July 18), but no body only listing.

This seems consistent with Canon stopping manufacture of the EOS M, or of just the white model.


----------



## Rick (Jul 11, 2013)

*Got my Order cancellation fromn Adorama today*


Dear Customer,

Thank you for ordering the CANON EOS M EF-M22MM STM KIT. Please understand that since this special offer was re-posted on numerous 'deals' websites, the demand for this item simply outnumbered the supply that we had on hand.

At this moment we are not able to get more quantity to be able to supply all open orders, we therefore have no other choice but to cancel your order.

You may see a 'Pending' charge or 'Authorization' charge in your account. Any authorization that may have been taken should expire 7 days from your original order date.

We apologize for any inconvenience.

Adorama Customer Service.


Oh well, hopefully the other vendor from whom I purchased the adapter will take my return.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 12, 2013)

*Re: Got my Order cancellation fromn Adorama today*



Rick said:


> Oh well, hopefully the other vendor from whom I purchased the adapter will take my return.



Amazon.com has the EOS M + 22mm kit in stock for $299.


----------



## hmmm (Jul 12, 2013)

*Re: Got my Order cancellation fromn Adorama today*



Rick said:


> Dear Customer,
> 
> Thank you for ordering the CANON EOS M EF-M22MM STM KIT. Please understand that since this special offer was re-posted on numerous 'deals' websites, the demand for this item simply outnumbered the supply that we had on hand.
> 
> ...





Dear Adorama,

Apology accepted. Good riddance.

Former Adorama Customer.


----------



## samkatz (Jul 12, 2013)

*repost: first take on my EOS M(had put in wrong thread)*

Got my EOS -M 22mm kit from B&H on Wed pm(ordered the day the sale started).

Will take a slight "learning curve" after using only the D- and Rebel series for 10 years, don't shoot in "live view" much.......

First impressions:
+very solid build,
+ no autofocus problems (S/W 2.02),
+ IQ very close to 60D(no surprise),haven't had a lens this fast since my Canon AE 1 Program 50MM 1.8

-
- controls not very intuitive to me(which is why I love the D series buttons)
- *feels strangely heavy*, even though it's light...sounds like an oxymoron, but the footprint is tiny, so the weight is concentrated in a small area.
-flash I bought (small sunpakRD2000 unit) really has lousy coverage.I didn't want to spend the $ for Canon unit. maybe down the road. 

I bought this on a whim as something I can keep with me as a second kit at all times, eg if I'm carrying my bird photography kit and want to grab a wider landscape or snapshot. Have been using my Samsung Galaxy for that, , but now I won't have to sacrifice an IQ should I want to really work with the images, print etc.

Whatever Canon's motivation for clearing these out at low price(assuming they cut wholesale price), I think they may have gotten the M-series in the hands of many of us who were not going there otherwise after the negative reviews plus high price. If I really get used to this, I'd add a short zoom, and down the road maybe the EOS MII, M&M or whatever they call the next version.


----------



## hmmm (Jul 12, 2013)

*Re: Got my Order cancellation fromn Adorama today*



Rick said:


> Dear Customer,
> 
> Thank you for ordering the CANON EOS M EF-M22MM STM KIT. Please understand that since this special offer was re-posted on numerous 'deals' websites, the demand for this item simply outnumbered the supply that we had on hand.
> 
> ...



Take 2:

Dear Adorama,

I did not realize at the time I ordered that your business practice is to multi-post your inventory on numerous websites, a practice that is misleading to the customer in that you can not guarantee availability of the inventory indicated in your listings.

My policy is to engage in the highest level of ethical integrity in my own business dealings; I seek to do business with vendors who also deal in a high level of ethical integrity.

With regret I must inform you that you have been removed from my list of preferred vendors at this time.

It is my hope that you will change your policy of multi-listing inventory and that perhaps at some future date your status as a preferred vendor may be reinstated.

Sincerely,

Former Adorama Customer


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 12, 2013)

hmmm,

You are being ridiculous. Adorama didn't repost it, places like Canon Rumors did, the only fault Adorama could be accused of is having an automated order service that doesn't cross reference stock numbers, that is obviously second in the order chain.

If I said I'll give anybody who asks $10 while sitting on my boat I'd give away a few hundred dollars, if my offer was re-posted here I'd be bankrupt. Adorama probably had tens or hundreds of EOS-M's, the increased interest and blanket internet chatter sold them out, no harm no foul.


----------



## Rick (Jul 12, 2013)

*Re: Got my Order cancellation fromn Adorama today*



neuroanatomist said:


> Rick said:
> 
> 
> > Oh well, hopefully the other vendor from whom I purchased the adapter will take my return.
> ...



$299.00 New 

Usually ships within 1 - 3 months. 

The 1 to 2 month ETA sort of bothered me.


----------



## hmmm (Jul 13, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> hmmm,
> 
> You are being ridiculous. Adorama didn't repost it, places like Canon Rumors did, the only fault Adorama could be accused of is having an automated order service that doesn't cross reference stock numbers, that is obviously second in the order chain.
> 
> If I said I'll give anybody who asks $10 while sitting on my boat I'd give away a few hundred dollars, if my offer was re-posted here I'd be bankrupt. Adorama probably had tens or hundreds of EOS-M's, the increased interest and blanket internet chatter sold them out, no harm no foul.



Everyone makes their own decisions about who to do business with, and I'm sure my change in how I personally evaluate Adorama is not going to drive them out of business...

However, if Vendor A sells item M on several different websites, and makes no disclaimer that Item M is being offered for sale elsewhere with its availability subject to previous sale, and vendor A represents that item M is in stock on those websites -- and vendor B maintains more accurate stock counts so that if they offer item M for sale there is a very high confidence that it is in fact in inventory -- then it would be rational, not ridiculous, to choose to do business with vendor B in the future once this business practice is known.

Vendor B is still on my preferred vendor list, and I wish I had ordered from vendor B in this case, as I have often done in the past. If I had ordered from vendor B I would have camera M in my pack now for my next hike.

Lesson learned.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 13, 2013)

or is it the classic story of the fire sale.

All these folk who didn't see the point, and didn't want an M, suddenly got one when the price dropped.

Sluts.

If you'd wanted one you'd have had one. You didn't. you wanted a bargain. Well. They don't last forever.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 13, 2013)

hmmm said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > hmmm,
> ...



If this was a normal "good deal" sale of an item, I could see your point that a seller should maintain accurate inventory control. But I think it is obvious (to most people) that this was an _extraordinary_ sale that could not last for long. At $300 a pop, I have to think that _somebody_ isn't pulling in the profit margin they had in mind, so the supply is bound to be limited. If you had decided to pull the trigger in a more timely manner and spent less time saying _"hmmm"_, you wouldn't have needed to post this.

_When you snooze you lose_


----------



## Helen Oster (Jul 15, 2013)

*Re: Got my Order cancellation fromn Adorama today*



hmmm said:


> Dear Adorama,
> 
> I did not realize at the time I ordered that your business practice is to multi-post your inventory on numerous websites, a practice that is misleading to the customer in that you can not guarantee availability of the inventory indicated in your listings.
> 
> ...



We do NOT multi-post our inventory on multiple websites.

We post our inventory at www.adorama.com

However, we have absolutely no control over how many people, on seeing a great deal, decide to multipost on their own websites, deal websites, blogs, shopping sites, photography groups etc.

Out of curiosity, did you place your order after seeing it on our website, or after seeing it posted on a 3rd party site?

We also cannot control how many special-priced units are purchased, not for personal use, but for re-sale on eBay, Craigslist etc - a swift look at, for example, Slick Deals, would indicate that is how a number of people actually make their living.

However, we accept and appreciate that there are many excellent photography retailers - alongside some with absolutely no ethics or moral fiber at all - and with regret, respect your decision to cease doing business with Adorama.

Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador
[email protected]


----------



## canon_convert (Jul 15, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> hmmm,
> 
> You are being ridiculous. Adorama didn't repost it, places like Canon Rumors did, the only fault Adorama could be accused of is having an automated order service that doesn't cross reference stock numbers, that is obviously second in the order chain.
> 
> If I said I'll give anybody who asks $10 while sitting on my boat I'd give away a few hundred dollars, if my offer was re-posted here I'd be bankrupt. Adorama probably had tens or hundreds of EOS-M's, the increased interest and blanket internet chatter sold them out, no harm no foul.



I completely agree. However, it's a shame that adorama can't include such a basic check in there ordering system.


----------



## Helen Oster (Jul 15, 2013)

canon_convert said:


> it's a shame that adorama can't include such a basic check in there ordering system.



Unfortunately the most common reason for this happening is when an item is unexpectedly popular and the orders we receive outpace our website’s inventory update system. Adorama Camera is built on customer satisfaction and we do try very hard to avoid situations that cause disappointment. 

We are always sorry when customers are inconvenienced because our website does not update in real time and therefore cannot always state that items selected by a customer are on backorder. When there is a greater demand for an item than anticipated, and we are already low on inventory and then receive several orders within just a few minutes via the various portals such as BizRate, Amazon and buy.com, plus via our own website, the 'phones and in store, it isn't immediately obvious to our stock-keeping system which customer is going to be disappointed. This is compounded because we do not ever make a charge until an item has actually shipped.

We understand that timing is often critical and want to ensure that our customers are aware of any possible delays; therefore, if an order which enters our system includes an item which isn’t available to ship immediately, we will do our best to notify customers by email on the first business day following receipt of the order.

Had this project come to fruition in summer 2011 as we were promised, http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/9/prweb9875018.htm we would by now have a much better stock-keeping situation. We are still committed to doing this, but as we are actually a family business, it is going to take us a lot longer than we'd ever dreamed it would - but will continue to work towards a solution to improve the response time of our inventory updates, and hope that you will continue to enjoy purchasing from Adorama.


----------



## canon_convert (Jul 15, 2013)

Hi Helen,

Thanks for the response. I understand adorama being a family business but, I think for a company your size such checks are a must despite orders coming in from various sources. I work for a fairly huge firm (with millions of transactions every hour at times) and I can speak from experience that implementing such checks shouldn't take more than few months provided adorama is willing to spend some $'s to revamp the ordering system. 

Having said that I do love shopping at adorama due to good CS experience i've had and would continue to do so in future as well.

cheers


----------



## Rick (Jul 16, 2013)

Helen Oster said:


> canon_convert said:
> 
> 
> > it's a shame that adorama can't include such a basic check in there ordering system.
> ...



Appreciate the response. Look forward to your inventory accounting update at some point. 

Was the sale marked as a clearance sale or was the disclaimer "while supplies last" used? CR didn't mention it in their annoucement. If they knew, I would think they would have made the distinction. I do not recall seeing this on any of the websites I visited looking for the item. I am curious as to whether the retailers involved knew this was a clearance sale.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 16, 2013)

Rick said:


> Helen Oster said:
> 
> 
> > canon_convert said:
> ...



You're kidding, _Right_?


----------



## Helen Oster (Jul 16, 2013)

canon_convert said:


> Hi Helen,
> 
> Thanks for the response. I understand adorama being a family business but, I think for a company your size such checks are a must despite orders coming in from various sources. I work for a fairly huge firm (with millions of transactions every hour at times) and I can speak from experience that implementing such checks shouldn't take more than few months provided adorama is willing to spend some $'s to revamp the ordering system.
> 
> ...



We invested an enormous amount of time and $$$ in this http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/9/prweb9875018.htm and were let down badly.

Don't forget, every $ we put into development has to come from somewhere.....


----------



## Helen Oster (Jul 16, 2013)

Rick said:


> Was the sale marked as a clearance sale or was the disclaimer "while supplies last" used?


I can't speak for any other retailer, but at Adorama, we didn't (You know that CR isn't a retailer, right?)


----------



## Zv (Jul 16, 2013)

What is this thread all about? From what I gather some dude ordered something that was on sale and then what? It went out of stock? Delay? So what? Suck it up and deal with it! 

The next EOS M camera is aparently a long rant about Adorama's electronic order system!


----------



## Rick (Jul 16, 2013)

Helen Oster said:


> Rick said:
> 
> 
> > Was the sale marked as a clearance sale or was the disclaimer "while supplies last" used?
> ...



Not following you. You did or didn't what?

How did you get the idea I thought CR was a retailer? It was clear that I thought that if the sale was a clearance sale, CR, as a reliabe resource for information, would have reported it as such.


----------



## Rick (Jul 16, 2013)

Zv said:


> What is this thread all about?



It's apparently over your head.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 17, 2013)

Rick said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > What is this thread all about?
> ...



Seems to be over yours. Start an adorama bashing thread if you must (and if the mods allow it) let this thread get back on topic.

The arguments lost when you start being abusive. 

Mods! Intervene, please.


----------



## Zv (Jul 17, 2013)

Rick said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > What is this thread all about?
> ...



Lol! I was smart enough to buy the EOS M when the priced dropped!


----------



## Helen Oster (Jul 17, 2013)

Rick said:


> Not following you. You did or didn't what?
> 
> How did you get the idea I thought CR was a retailer? It was clear that I thought that if the sale was a clearance sale, CR, as a reliable resource for information, would have reported it as such.



You asked "Was the sale marked as a clearance sale or was the disclaimer "while supplies last" used?

I responded: "I can't speak for any other retailer, but at Adorama, *we didn't*" 

You said: "I am curious as to whether the retailer*s* involved knew this was a clearance sale"

As far as I am aware, Adorama is *the retailer* being discussed in this thread


You said "CR didn't mention it in their announcement. If they knew, I would think they would have made the distinction" 

Adorama didn't classify it as a "clearance sale" so there is no reason to suppose that CR, an Adorama affiliate, would do so either.

You said; "I do not recall seeing this on any of the websites I visited looking for the item", which suggests that none of the retailers whose websites you visited classified it as a 'clearance sale' either.

I am really sorry for your disappointment, and the disappointment of everyone else who wasn't able to jump on this deal in time, but when an item is in limited supply, and the demand is greater than that supply, someone will miss out.

Signing up for special offer emails from Adorama, and or following one of our Twitter accounts or our Facebook page might get you ahead of the game for similar offers in the future.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2013)

As was mentioned by someone else, my B&H invoice for the M + 22 indicated a $300 manufacturer's instant rebate.


----------



## Hodag (Jul 17, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> As was mentioned by someone else, my B&H invoice for the M + 22 indicated a $300 manufacturer's instant rebate.



Either of the big two is just fine. I happen to have an account at B&H, shipping using my business UPS number, CC on record and I'm happy. My Brother is an Adorama fan. They are both wonderful. (end of that debate)

I jumped on the $299 EOS-M with the 22MM because it's just what I've wanted for years. Small APS-C, pocketable. I've had a G1-X, G-12, and S-90 and sold them within a month. So for someone who wants a new model that might be here in 2015, possibly for double the price, have fun watching and waiting, and save your money.

Discontinued, clearance, just words. It's the same camera as it was in June... but now for $299! Mirrorless camera with lens, 18MP. Some people are just best at finding fault and what's wrong in life. Or maybe just making themselves miserable? I'm looking forward to my new EOS-M.


----------



## Screwdriver (Jul 19, 2013)

I was not in the market for the M, in fact I rarely pay attention to what's new as long as what I got is working. I check CR every few months to see what might be coming down the pipe and I saw the Canon M deal, and in fact I had not even know about the M before. I read some reviews and saw that Canon released a firmware that fixed the issues, so I bought one with the 22mm. Great camera and ridiculously cheap. My wife liked it so much, I bought her one with the 18-55mm.

People that bag on this camera at the $299 pricepoint crack me up. What decent camera can you buy for $299 new these days? I own a 60D and a 5Dc and this little guy can spar with them, and go home in a coat pocket.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 19, 2013)

Screwdriver said:


> People that bag on this camera at the $299 pricepoint crack me up. What decent camera can you buy for $299 new these days? I own a 60D and a 5Dc and this little guy can spar with them, and go home in a coat pocket.



I'm glad you're amused. I've owned a G10 for several years (plus a 5D3, a 7D and a slew of lenses) so, for me, the real alternative is not in buying a different camera, but rather not buying any camera at all right now and waiting for something that fills my needs better, even if it is more expensive.


----------



## canon_convert (Jul 20, 2013)

Helen Oster said:


> We invested an enormous amount of time and $$$ in this http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/9/prweb9875018.htm and were let down badly.
> 
> Don't forget, every $ we put into development has to come from somewhere.....



oh boy....such a big let down. I hope you get your moneys worth ...eventually


----------



## Screwdriver (Jul 20, 2013)

Bob Howland said:


> I'm glad you're amused. I've owned a G10 for several years (plus a 5D3, a 7D and a slew of lenses) so, for me, the real alternative is not in buying a different camera, but rather not buying any camera at all right now and waiting for something that fills my needs better, even if it is more expensive.



But the M is filling my needs and it was cheap.....


----------



## sjprg (Jul 21, 2013)

Personally I got the M so I could get my 1DSIII off of the 100-400 to be used for other things. I've been testing the M on my 28-300 with a 2X TC with manual focusing and the 100-400 with a 1.4 TC. The camera really cuts down the weight on the end of these lenses and I have no complaints about the IQ. I'll probably try to find another at the sale price to go on the other lens. I've actually tried the 100-400 with the 1.4 + the 2.0 TC with the M and the IQ is reasonable, though not for low light use.
Using these in MF mode is hidden in the English user manual PDF on page 126 for those like me whom had trouble finding it. Turn the LCD brightness to Max for daylight use.


----------



## sneakerpimp (Jul 23, 2013)

neech7 said:


> US buyers also have the option of buying online from Canada:
> 
> http://www.henrys.com/78480-CANON-EF-M-11-22MM-F4-5-6-IS-STM-LENS.aspx



Henry's sent me a tracking number today ;D


----------

