# *UPDATED* Is This The Canon EOS M5?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 6, 2016)

```
<strong>*UPDATE*</strong>

We’re told by a good source that this does indeed look the EOS M5, which we expect to be announced late next week.</p>
<p>The LCD only flips vertically, not to the side like the EOS 80D.</p>
<p>You can read what we know about the EOS M5 <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-m5-coming-before-photokina-cr3/">here</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Original Post:</strong>

These sketches (or Photoshop filtered images) of a Canon camera have appeared on <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=30681.msg621061;topicseen#new">our forum</a> and in our inbox. We have been unable to confirm their authenticity at the time of publishing, but we will update the post once we hear if these are legit or not.</p>
<p>We have been told that the EOS M5 would have ergonomic updates, such as a larger grip as well as an EVF.</p>

		<style type='text/css'>
			#gallery-1 {
				margin: auto;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-item {
				float: left;
				margin-top: 10px;
				text-align: center;
				width: 25%;
			}
			#gallery-1 img {
				border: 2px solid #cfcfcf;
			}
			#gallery-1 .gallery-caption {
				margin-left: 0;
			}
			/* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */
		</style>
		<div id='gallery-1' class='gallery galleryid-26708 gallery-columns-4 gallery-size-thumbnail'><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/eosm5sketch.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/eosm5sketch-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="eosm5sketch" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/eosm5sketch-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/eosm5sketch-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/eosm5sketch2.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/eosm5sketch2-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="eosm5sketch2" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/eosm5sketch2-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/eosm5sketch2-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl>
			<br style='clear: both' />
		</div>

<p> </p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## digigal (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

If that's the case, looks like it might hold a larger battery!


----------



## candc (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Looks a7ish with rounded edges.


----------



## rs (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Where would accurate hand drawn images come from? Do any Canon user manuals or other media feature them?

Ignoring the fact that these aren't photos, this design does look plausible.


----------



## Lars (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



candc said:


> Looks a7ish with rounded edges.



More like an SL1, I think. Particularly in the grip. Which is what I was hoping for.


----------



## 7DmkI (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Hope it won't be too bulky otherwise it will lose its size advantage.


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



7DmkI said:


> Hope it won't be too bulky otherwise it will lose its size advantage.



+1

While just an artist's impression it does look very big.

I may be interested in the M5 but only if it is of similar size to something like the Sony RX100 Mark IV. 

I want the truly portable camera to fit in my pocket, that does not look like it will fit in my pocket.


----------



## StephenHopkins (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Looks very nice. I do have to wonder like others why or what sketched images would have a purpose for.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Canon Rumors said:


> These sketches of a Canon camera have appeared



I thought they were just that, just some speculative drawings.


----------



## applecider (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

From what I've seen elsewhere the small mirror less size only holds if one is satisfied with f 4 or smaller aperatures in the attached lenses. Once you get a 2.8 or larger lens the lens is as big or bigger than a dslr with the same lens.

An SL2 with the 80D sensor and wifi + gps would be sweet especially if they hit the SL 1 price point. It could use a bigger grip and therefore maybe battery ? A bit more fps and improved focus and it's a winner.


----------



## candc (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Lars said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > Looks a7ish with rounded edges.
> ...



The knobs, shutter button, and strap lugs are Sony standard, not Canon


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



candc said:


> Lars said:
> 
> 
> > candc said:
> ...



sony has standards?


----------



## candc (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



rrcphoto said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > Lars said:
> ...



At least for the strap lugs anyway. I hate them, that's why I noticed.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



candc said:


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



good catch actually.. 

imagine if that was it? that woud be the 3rd lug design change in 4 freaking cameras.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



expatinasia said:


> 7DmkI said:
> 
> 
> > Hope it won't be too bulky otherwise it will lose its size advantage.
> ...



that's impossible.


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



candc said:


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



Pretty much all the manufacturers are using those same lugs on mirrorless bodies, Canon included.

EDIT: Actually I take that back, the ones Canon has been using most recently are a bit more rectangular.


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Sorry to whoever sketched this but it looks pretty ugly- like a cross between a Sony cam, XC15, EOS-M, and an SL1. I thought this was supposed to be retro. 

It'll have 4k video, right?

(That's a joke)


----------



## jebrady03 (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



applecider said:


> An SL2 with the 80D sensor and wifi + gps would be sweet especially if they hit the SL 1 price point. It could use a bigger grip and therefore maybe battery ? A bit more fps and improved focus and it's a winner.


Hey! Congrats! Your post is the most ridiculous thus far! Never fear however, as the original post isn't very old and I don't expect yours to be the most absurd for long.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Sketch? Looks more like a photo that has been run through a couple of Photoshop filters.


----------



## x-vision (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



rs said:


> Ignoring the fact that these aren't photos, this design does look plausible.



+1 

The design language is reminiscent of newer Canon bodies.
So, a plausible design indeed.


----------



## x-vision (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



unfocused said:


> Sketch? Looks more like a photo that has been run through a couple of Photoshop filters.



That's what I thought too.


----------



## Pascal Parvex (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



expatinasia said:


> While just an artist's impression it does look very big.
> 
> I may be interested in the M5 but only if it is of similar size to something like the Sony RX100 Mark IV.
> 
> I want the truly portable camera to fit in my pocket, that does not look like it will fit in my pocket.



It looks big because it holds an APS-C sized sensor. The Sony RX100 Mark IV only has a one inch sensor, so it can be smaller.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



unfocused said:


> Sketch? Looks more like a photo that has been run through a couple of Photoshop filters.



could be .. but the layout is odd.
assuming that's an EC dial. the dial around the shutter button is non existent, would seem odd that they'd dump that between the M3 and M5.

that would be three dials plus EC. canon's never done that (one around shutter, one in top dial, one for EC and one down around the back around the menu,etc).

there's no flash button.

doesn't seem to be an on off button / toggle anywhere.


----------



## rs (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Pascal Parvex said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > While just an artist's impression it does look very big.
> ...



Plus it has a built in lens. Another major space saving. Just compare the Nikon 1 system even with its smallest lens to any of the RX100 series.

If anyone wants RX100 size, you're pretty much limited to cameras of the RX100 type - small sensor fixed lens compacts.


----------



## H. Jones (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

I totally love this design. Make it full frame and I'd definitely buy one for full-time back-up, travel, and everyday carry uses. 

I know of a fellow journalist that successfully used an original M on a bigger story after both of their 5D mark IIIs were stolen, so maybe I'd take serious consideration into it even as a crop-sensor camera depending on the reviews-- it looks way ahead of the original one.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Some folks around here are really hungry. I'm sorry, but nothing about these sketches looks like a Canon. This doesn't even get a CR0


----------



## douglaurent (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Canon, if you go mirrorless, just please release a 5D4 mirrorless version - and include all convenient features you can find in an A7R2. You will sell more cameras and get much better feedback than if you spread existing and obvious nice features over 20 camera models in the coming 10 years. Just because a lot of Canon users have not realized today how convenient features of the competitiors are, doesn't mean you will keep them loyal customers forever with the current tactics of slow innovation.


----------



## Rocky (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Here goes the pocketability.


----------



## rs (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



brad-man said:


> Some folks around here are really hungry. I'm sorry, but nothing about these sketches looks like a Canon. This doesn't even get a CR0



In my eyes it shares a lot of design themes from the M3, SX60 and G5X.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

If this is the M5, I'll wait for the SL2 (I already own EF and EF-S lenses)—or buy an α6xxx and a Zeiss 12mm f/2.8 Touit.


----------



## padam (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Looks like the real deal.

Now the question is: how much it is going to be. Maybe around A6300 pricing?

Also, I wonder why an EF -> EF-M Speed Booster hasn't been announced yet, it would make a lot of sense now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOky2XA8UP0


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



rrcphoto said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > 7DmkI said:
> ...



Of course it is not. Making a quality pocketable camera like the RX100 but with a Canon badge and improvements is not impossible.

Unless Canon is changing the M brand, it was always meant to be nice and small. The sketches are way too big.


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Pascal Parvex said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > While just an artist's impression it does look very big.
> ...



So then what's the point? Why not just get an 80D or rebel. I always thought the M series was supposed to be a quality pocketable camera.


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



expatinasia said:


> Of course it is not. Making a quality pocketable camera like the RX100 but with a Canon badge and improvements is not impossible.



You're describing the G7X.


----------



## DigiAngel (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

if it has working AF, count me in  in fact i find it more interesting than upgrading my 5D III to a IV.


----------



## rocketsurgeon (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

So they photoshop an image of a camera to make it look like a new model but it still looks like a fake, so run a couple filters over it and call it a sketch! Now nobody can tell that it's a crappy photoshop because it was clearly drawn with a pencil! Except to people who actually know what a real drawing looks like, because this is not a sketch or drawing of any kind.


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Not sure if the images are of the M5, but here is hoping they are. That camera looks fantastic.


----------



## Ketix (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Alright, so for everyone who thinks this is too big or not big enough or for the pople who are glad that it now has a bigger grip I have prepared this quick overlay for you. 
To me it looks like it's exactly the same size as the M3, just with a little bump for the EVF. I tried to align the Lens as best as I could so it's not 100% perfectly aligned (it was hard enough to find a pic with the same perspective).
If this thing is real I'm quite happy. I like the size and grip of the M3 and I prefer the M3 styling over the G5X styling and button/dial layout. M3 feels more natural and thought out. I also think that nowadays anything that even remotely looks like a SLR of the film era (not as thick as todays DSLRs) will get the monicker of retro styling so I'm not disappointed that it doesn't look like a Canon A1/ AE1. Actually I'm wuite happy with the design. Looks like a mini 5D.
It's a shame though that they go for those silly strap lugs. I may be the only one who prefers the EOS M lugs wit the quick detach strap but I would have been OK with the M3 lugs as well. Those things suggested here are really not nice to use especially for your right hand. Those little key ring triangle things are somehow always in the way.


----------



## expatinasia (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



dilbert said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > Making a quality pocketable camera like the RX100 but with a Canon badge and improvements is not impossible.
> ...



No. Who cares about the colour?! Yes I would like a RX100 with Canon menu system. Or Canon to make the equivalent, or better, of whatever the RX100 Mark V may or may not be (if Sony ever makes one).

As long as it is not pink, I don't care....


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Ketix said:


> Alright, so for everyone who thinks this is too big or not big enough or for the pople who are glad that it now has a bigger grip I have prepared this quick overlay for you.
> ...


Thank you for preparing this for us.
Exactly what I was supposing when I saw that pic:
Some kind of chimera of EOS M with Lumix GH4 bulge.



digigal said:


> ... looks like it might hold a larger battery!


So "No!" to this, sorry!


----------



## hubie (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



expatinasia said:


> 7DmkI said:
> 
> 
> > Hope it won't be too bulky otherwise it will lose its size advantage.
> ...



Buy different pants then . It looks still very portable. Let's see how it will work out.


----------



## Bennymiata (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Personally, I think this sketch looks ugly and certainly not as stylish as the Fuji cameras.

If they put DPAF and on-chip a/d processor, it'll be a winner.
With a built-in evf, even I might buy one!


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Looks awful! Hope these sketches are not even close to the final form factor.


----------



## WorkonSunday (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

wow, i love it. feels like canon's own version of OMD but with APSC.

i can feel my XT2 money being sucked out of my pocket! let's hope DR is improved upon M3.


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

its certainly is a fake considering there is a hot shoe cover. Canon has a fail-safe switch in hotshoe which disables the built-in flash from firing. That failsafe has been the reason why I have to modify my Graslon diffuser before the built in flash worked with diffuser installed.

Edit: if the camera does look like that then its a massive ergonomic improvement over older M cameras.


----------



## kanehi (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

The design is either the 6DII or maybe an SL1? Hopefully Canon will now introduce a true mirrorless camera with EF or EF-S lenses.


----------



## Meatcurry (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Yeah, looks like a filter rather than an actual drawing, so either legit or photo shopped image


----------



## ClickIt_AC (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Lars said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > Looks a7ish with rounded edges.
> ...



+1 (Wasn't an SL1 replacement mooted in the forums around Feb/March 2016?) 

... Found it/Merger of M and SL1...
http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-eos-rebel-sl1-discontinued/


----------



## rs (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



kanehi said:


> The design is either the 6DII or maybe an SL1? Hopefully Canon will now introduce a true mirrorless camera with EF or EF-S lenses.


Like the Pentax K-01? I hope not!

This image clearly has an EF-M lens attached.


----------



## wockawocka (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Canon Rumors said:


> These sketches of a Canon camera have appeared on <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=30681.msg621061;topicseen#new">our forum</a> and in our inbox. We have been unable to confirm their authenticity at the time of publishing, but we will update the post once we hear if these are legit or not.</p>
> <p>We have been told that the EOS M5 would have ergonomic updates, such as a larger grip as well as an EVF.</p>
> 
> <style type='text/css'>
> ...



FF, global silent shutter, EF compatible with on chip A/D conversion?

Sign me up.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

It would be the first time Canon have used traditional strap lugs since EOS was introduced. Can't see it really, unless it's part of the "retro" design, harking back to the AE-1, but Canon wouldn't do that - would they ?


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

this shape, form and size is exactly what I do NOT want for as a mirrorless APS-C camera. Way too big to carry it along. I want a form factor pretty much like like Sony A6300. 

And all those freaking retro dials on top ... dedicated shutter time dial, dedicated EV +/- dial, dedicated mono functional cr*p ... and NO front wheel for index-finger! Plus a big hump on top although there is no prism and no need for that camel hump up there ... it really hate that retro "mini-DSLR" styling. As fugly and bulky as G5X or Fuji or Oly stuff. 

In one word: it sucks. Unfortunately that is exactly what I imagine stupid Canon may bring next.


----------



## Woody (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

I love what I'm seeing. Size doesn't matter; just make sure it's light-weight.

An SL2 that is mirrorless. Maybe it'll get the new OVF-EVF thingy.

Hope it's an articulate screen.

Most importantly, it better offer DPAF and touchscreen.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Size does matter for me. 

Apart from all the other advantages of mirrorless cameras, compact size is paramount to me. Anything up to EOS M3 / Sony A6300 is acceptable to me in terms of size ... for a crop-sensor APS-C camera. If the body is any bigger, it's gotta have an FF sensor inside. SL-1 size and form factor would not do for me. I prefer it to be "range-finder-shaped" as possible, not like a small mirrorslapper without a mirror.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



c.d.embrey said:


> If this is the M5, I'll wait for the SL2 (I already own EF and EF-S lenses)—or buy an α6xxx and a Zeiss 12mm f/2.8 Touit.


That's why my travel camera is Fujifilm. I hope the new M body has similar (if not better) features like competition (Fuji X-T1/2, X-T10, a6300/6000, OM-D-1/5). Otherwise they will never capture many users.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



AvTvM said:


> Unfortunately that is exactly what I imagine stupid Canon may bring next.



AKA: What most of the market is asking for.

I'd rather have the rangefinder style too, but apparently the humpy bodies sell pretty well. Fuji seems to have had great success with the X-T1 and X-T10, where rumors currently point to the X-E2 not getting a replacement.

Also note that Canon likes to put the front wheel underneath the shutter button on EOS-M, I think it's just a little hard to see in the drawing.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



9VIII said:


> Also note that Canon likes to put the front wheel underneath the shutter button on EOS-M, I think it's just a little hard to see in the drawing.



hmmm ... loooking again, there seems to be a knurled ring-wheel around the shutter button.


----------



## Hector1970 (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

If it were the size of an SL1 (100D) Id be happy
If they went that size they may as well make it and EF mount and abandon the current mount.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Hector1970 said:


> If they went that size they may as well make it and EF mount and abandon the current mount.


correct.

Clunky body negates all advantages of short flange distance.


----------



## Meatcurry (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



AvTvM said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Also note that Canon likes to put the front wheel underneath the shutter button on EOS-M, I think it's just a little hard to see in the drawing.
> ...



Just like the M3 then?


----------



## 1Zach1 (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Wow I hope not.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Meatcurry said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...



yep, looks same or very similar.


----------



## hachu21 (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

I bet that those are launch pictures with some pencil effect filter applied.
Like it or not, it's a M3 with :
- updated sensor (hopefully DPAF)
- EVF
- on-board flash
- Digic 7 (hopefuly as well!)


----------



## docsmith (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

That looks like a camera I might buy. I was hoping for a pop-up EVF, to help minimize size, but this is not that much larger, so it is still small.

Give it fast AF, dSLR menu, and a current generation sensor, I would be very tempted to upgrade from my M1 and further expand my EF-m gear (currently only the 22 and 18-55 lenses).


----------



## ddrik (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

I don't think it's the real thing, the lens seems out of alignment with the rest of the body.
doesn't mean the M5 could look very similar with the viewfinder in that position.

Another thing that makes me assume this is not the real M5 is the fact that the flipscreen looks too similar to the M3, and with the viewfinder, flipping the screen up wouldn't really be very practical, if not impossible.

I'm expecting a fully articulating flipscreen like in the G5X will be introduced in the M series.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



x-vision said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Sketch? Looks more like a photo that has been run through a couple of Photoshop filters.
> ...



+1


----------



## ggweci (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Ketix said:


> Alright, so for everyone who thinks this is too big or not big enough or for the pople who are glad that it now has a bigger grip I have prepared this quick overlay for you.
> To me it looks like it's exactly the same size as the M3, just with a little bump for the EVF. I tried to align the Lens as best as I could so it's not 100% perfectly aligned (it was hard enough to find a pic with the same perspective).
> If this thing is real I'm quite happy. I like the size and grip of the M3 and I prefer the M3 styling over the G5X styling and button/dial layout. M3 feels more natural and thought out. I also think that nowadays anything that even remotely looks like a SLR of the film era (not as thick as todays DSLRs) will get the monicker of retro styling so I'm not disappointed that it doesn't look like a Canon A1/ AE1. Actually I'm wuite happy with the design. Looks like a mini 5D.
> It's a shame though that they go for those silly strap lugs. I may be the only one who prefers the EOS M lugs wit the quick detach strap but I would have been OK with the M3 lugs as well. Those things suggested here are really not nice to use especially for your right hand. Those little key ring triangle things are somehow always in the way.



Nice comparison overlay - thanks. This is what I expected when I saw the "drawing" of the M5. Looks good IMO.

As for the strap lugs, I prefer this style for mirrorless compare to the M3 ones. I find them better when using no strap, as they are a smaller profile (sans triangles) and I use detachable straps like the peak design ones and find that their attachments work great with these lugs on smaller cameras. On DSLRs, the standard Canon ones are great.


----------



## Stichus III (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



ddrik said:


> Another thing that makes me assume this is not the real M5 is the fact that the flipscreen looks too similar to the M3, and with the viewfinder, flipping the screen up wouldn't really be very practical, if not impossible.



The flipscreen does not look similar to the one on the M3. The screen on the M3 has 2 squared shapes on the top side of the screen, which are obviously absent here. These squared shapes on the M3 are part of the top hinge.


----------



## LDS (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

What's wrong if *one* model in the M line up is somewhat bigger than the others and offers a more DSLR-like experience? If this was the *only* model I can understand critics - but if Canon would make different models with the EF-M mount, some smaller, lighter and more pocketable (maybe with no EVF, grips, less dials, etc.), and other bigger and with a different ergonomics aimed at photographers who may prefer that, what's the issue? Just look at the G5X and G7X. Different designs for different users. One doesn't replace the other.
I really find funny some people believe each and every model must be designed for their own very needs only. Isn't the model for you? Pass, and wait for the next one.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Ketix said:


> Alright, so for everyone who thinks this is too big or not big enough or for the pople who are glad that it now has a bigger grip I have prepared this quick overlay for you.
> To me it looks like it's exactly the same size as the M3, just with a little bump for the EVF. I tried to align the Lens as best as I could so it's not 100% perfectly aligned (it was hard enough to find a pic with the same perspective).
> If this thing is real I'm quite happy. I like the size and grip of the M3 and I prefer the M3 styling over the G5X styling and button/dial layout. M3 feels more natural and thought out. I also think that nowadays anything that even remotely looks like a SLR of the film era (not as thick as todays DSLRs) will get the monicker of retro styling so I'm not disappointed that it doesn't look like a Canon A1/ AE1. Actually I'm wuite happy with the design. Looks like a mini 5D.
> It's a shame though that they go for those silly strap lugs. I may be the only one who prefers the EOS M lugs wit the quick detach strap but I would have been OK with the M3 lugs as well. Those things suggested here are really not nice to use especially for your right hand. Those little key ring triangle things are somehow always in the way.


To supplement the overlay you posted earlier here is a gif...


----------



## Quackator (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

I am still mad at them for not providing the 
option to disable exposure simulation in the M3.

Impossible to use with studio flash and simple 
radio triggers in the studio. Or dumb strobist 
flashes and simple triggers.

They better provide that this time. And fix the
firmware for the M3 for that.


----------



## 1kind (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Stichus III said:


> ddrik said:
> 
> 
> > Another thing that makes me assume this is not the real M5 is the fact that the flipscreen looks too similar to the M3, and with the viewfinder, flipping the screen up wouldn't really be very practical, if not impossible.
> ...


Since the M5 looks to have built-in EVF, the flip screen will probably flip down and not up since the evf will be in the way.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



LDS said:


> What's wrong if *one* model in the M line up is somewhat bigger than the others and offers a more DSLR-like experience? If this was the *only* model I can understand critics - but if Canon would make different models with the EF-M mount, some smaller, lighter and more pocketable (maybe with no EVF, grips, less dials, etc.), and other bigger and with a different ergonomics aimed at photographers who may prefer that, what's the issue? Just look at the G5X and G7X. Different designs for different users. One doesn't replace the other.
> I really find funny some people believe each and every model must be designed for their own very needs only. Isn't the model for you? Pass, and wait for the next one.



To me it is like with cars: I want performance in a small package ... like a Mini Cooper S ... not some sorry underpowerperforming Hundai Pony or VW Fox. 

So, if Canon made 2 versions of M5 - one big, one small, no problem - I'll buy the small one. But since Canon very likely will only make one version and all other Canon M bodies are sorry, underpowered dogs without built-in EVF, I want this new dog to be *powerful and as small as feasible*. 8)

My ideal EOS M would be a body similar to Sony RX1R-II with minimum Canon 80D performance, full EOS user interface and that fine EF-M mount up front.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



LDS said:


> I really find funny some people believe each and every model must be designed for their own very needs only.



Indeed, and it it's not, well then, Canon is *******. :


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



neuroanatomist said:


> LDS said:
> 
> 
> > I really find funny some people believe each and every model must be designed for their own very needs only.
> ...



or stupid :


----------



## ddrik (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



1kind said:


> Stichus III said:
> 
> 
> > ddrik said:
> ...



they better introduce it with a new kind of tripod than.
and if that tripod would mount to the hotshoe.. a downwards flipping screen would be just fine.
in any other case. i'd prefer a fully articulated flipscreen over a down flipping screen anytime


----------



## Stichus III (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



1kind said:


> Stichus III said:
> 
> 
> > ddrik said:
> ...



Or the screen will be fully articulating. The M3 screen flips both up and down. Flipping only down will certainly be a sizable step back.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



Stichus III said:


> 1kind said:
> 
> 
> > Stichus III said:
> ...



no side hinge


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



LDS said:


> I really find funny some people believe each and every model must be designed for their own very needs only. Isn't the model for you? Pass, and wait for the next one.



Not EVERY model. Just ONE every 3-5 years. The one I will buy.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



dilbert said:


> An OVF/EVF that protruded more might not be a bad idea...



I'd prefer a pop-up EVF left top. Like on Sony RX100 3 / 4 and on RX1R II. Nose does not touch LCD then. And a left hinged, full articulated LCD would also be compatible with it. With Canon touchscreen, stupid Sony!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



dilbert said:


> The OVF hanging out the back is kind of necessary - it's hard enough with Canon's DSLRs to get your eye up to the eye piece without squishing your nose. An OVF/EVF that protruded more might not be a bad idea...



Some camcorders – my Vixia HF M41, for example – have a 'pull out' eyepiece for the EVF as seen on this Panasonic model.


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



AvTvM said:


> I'd prefer a pop-up EVF left top. Like on Sony RX100 3 / 4 and on RX1R II. *Nose does not touch LCD then.* And a left hinged, full articulated LCD would also be compatible with it. With Canon touchscreen, stupid Sony!



Only if you're right eye dominant.


----------



## Stichus III (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



rrcphoto said:


> Stichus III said:
> 
> 
> > 1kind said:
> ...



How can you see that from these 2 renderings?


----------



## Schwingi (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*

Looks nice imho, we will see.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



neuroanatomist said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > The OVF hanging out the back is kind of necessary - it's hard enough with Canon's DSLRs to get your eye up to the eye piece without squishing your nose. An OVF/EVF that protruded more might not be a bad idea...
> ...


Is that a pull-out EVF in your pocket or are you just glad to see to see me?


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



rrcphoto said:


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



Or miserly with their features


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*


A few thoughts on this new sketch:


Apparently, 'Slightly upmarket' means lots of knobs, an integral viewfinder, a more 'traditional' Rebel looking pop-up flash, and a chunkier grip for better hold of bigger lenses and (hopefully) a bigger battery. No idea what's under the hood of course, but this concept (if real) would be a very promising course correction.


Whoever was asking for a RX100 IV form factor from a modular mount APS-C rig needs to step away from the magic mushrooms and come back to reality. See pic -- unless Canon gets excited about f/8 'pinhole lens cap pancakes', there's simply no chance if it will rival a 1" sensor with integral lens. You should consider the Nikon 1 system (as big a flop as Ishtar?) as an alternate reality if Canon went all-in on small.


Whoever implied Canon might go retro with this rig: _Stop that, you._ The world needs another retro-for-retro's-sake camera about as much as we need another EOS M without a built-in viewfinder. Let Canon be Canon -- retro/stylized/etc. is not what they do, and it's one of the reasons why I love them.

- A


----------



## LDS (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



AvTvM said:


> My ideal EOS M would be a body similar to Sony RX1R-II



Yes, but 4K would also be the price, not only the video capability...

I don't believe Canon wishes to enter Leica market, or something alike, with the M line. For what I know of Canon history they never tried to make and sell "luxury items" for a small set of customers.

High-end professional workhorses like the F-1, T90 and 1D(X) yes, high-end prosumer models like the A-1 and 5D too, and even compacts like the G line, but I don't remember very expensive "luxury" models. Probably it doesn't need that kind of self-promotion - sometimes those models are made even if they sell little to "pump" a brand image.

Just like some sport version of small cars are made to sell more of the other models to people who can't afford the sport version - which will get more free promotion....


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

re. form factor, layout and size:
http://j.mp/2bR5sEk

One of the cameras has a viewfinder built in, the other not
One of the cameras has a FF sensor, the other a much smaller APS-C crop sensor
Both cameras waste space on top deck for an unnecessary, monofunctional EV +/- dial 
One camera has a lens mount, the other not
One camera costs around 3000 €, the other € 700 (with lens).


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> *UPDATE* We’re told by a good source that this does indeed look the EOS M5, which we expect to be announced late next week.
> The LCD only flips vertically, not to the side the EOS 80D.
> 
> You can read what we know about the EOS M5 here.
> ...



well thanks for the updates.. huh.

so that's it.

a gimpy little SLR looking M. whoot?

I guess no surprise that the M series is following the Gx series cameras.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> re. form factor, layout and size:
> http://j.mp/2bR5sEk
> 
> One of the cameras



the biggest is that one has a onboard flash the other does not, and has an ILC socket.

both consume room.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



ahsanford said:


> Whoever implied Canon might go retro with this rig: _Stop that, you._ The world needs another retro-for-retro's-sake camera about as much as we need another EOS M without a built-in viewfinder. Let Canon be Canon -- retro/stylized/etc. is not what they do, and it's one of the reasons why I love them.



true. but I would love to see a modern T90 digital EF and FD mount both with AF (FD focal lengths limited of course) and both FD and EF adapters with focal reducers.

going back to basically the birth of modern EOS ergonomics and way of thinking would be kind of nice.

the AE-1 was pretty revolutionary at the time, and why shouldn't canon who is the largest camera manufacturer, and second only to Nikon in storied past celebrate some of it's history?

I'm not saying go full retro like Fuji . because that's simply moronic and removes canon haptics and ergonomics .. but classic AE-1 styling? T90 styling? why not?


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 6, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> re. form factor, layout and size:
> http://j.mp/2bR5sEk
> 
> One of the cameras has a viewfinder built in, the other not
> ...



Let's compare apples to apples, shall we?: 

Full-frame fixed vs. interchangeable: http://camerasize.com/compact/#638,624.429,ha,t
(both are 35mm f/2 lenses)

APS-C fixed vs. interchangeable: http://camerasize.com/compact/#566,599.349,ha,t
(both have 22-23mm f/2 lenses on them)

A fixed lens body can bury the lens in there to a somewhat dramatic effect. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



rrcphoto said:


> I'm not saying go full retro like Fuji . because that's simply moronic and removes canon haptics and ergonomics .. but classic AE-1 styling? T90 styling? why not?



Short answer: Nostalgia doesn't improve the shooting experience. I'd prefer to have a rig that feels like a current Canon, so that when I switch from my 5D3 to one of these things, it's not foreign to use.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

say no to retro. What was necessary, right and possible in the analogue age means nothing but poor ergonomics in digital cameras. And bad looks too. The latter statement is subjective. ;D


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> say no to retro. What was necessary, right and possible in the analogue age means nothing but poor ergonomics in digital cameras. And bad looks too. The latter statement is subjective. ;D



the T90? poor ergonomics for digital cameras? sniffing back the glue some?


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



ahsanford said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not saying go full retro like Fuji . because that's simply moronic and removes canon haptics and ergonomics .. but classic AE-1 styling? T90 styling? why not?
> ...



true, but you can pick up a T90 and it feels like any other digital canon.

AE-1 not so much, but the T90 was the birth of modern computerized Canon EOS cameras and ergonomic design.


----------



## KrisK (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



ahsanford said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not saying go full retro like Fuji . because that's simply moronic and removes canon haptics and ergonomics .. but classic AE-1 styling? T90 styling? why not?
> ...



Interesting. I pick up my AE-1 to remind myself of what an immersive OVF feels like (that thing is HUGE), but could do without the cold, sharp body. These newfangled "plastics" might not be so bad after all.

And while I like Fuji's control system, Canon's M lenses don't have manual aperture rings, so there's no point in even attempting that sort of thing, is there?


----------



## PureClassA (Sep 6, 2016)

This looks like a really well designed MILC if this is legit. I like my EOS-M, but it's too small to be comfortable. This looks like a real ergonomic winner. Anxious to see what sensor they stick in there. Staying APS-C I'm sure. Probably the 24MP 80D sensor? DPAF too? Should be fun!


----------



## HaroldC3 (Sep 6, 2016)

I was really hoping for a fully articulating touchscreen like the G5x.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



rrcphoto said:


> true, but you can pick up a T90 and it feels like any other digital canon.
> 
> AE-1 not so much, but the T90 was the birth of modern computerized Canon EOS cameras and ergonomic design.



Sure, but you're in chunky SLR grip fantasy land with that one. 100% agree with you, but no way that will fly with the "It's gotta fit in my pocket" camp (a.k.a. the 'reasonable' folks ;D).

Of course, there's little reason _not_ to have a huge chunky grip once you leave the silly world of "I only need that great 22mm f/2 lens _for my modular lens system!"_ Once you break the shackles of that fantasy, having a proper grip like the 5D3 makes a ton of sense:


Once you leave pancake dream land, the grip will not be larger (front to back) than the EOS-M body + even a modest kit zoom lens purpose built for EF-M. 
a 5D3-like grip will fit your hands comfortably. (Revolutionary, I know.)
You could have a lovely top LCD for quick setting of controls that uses less power than the EVF or LCD.
You could put a bigger battery in there.

Just for fun, I frankensteined in the 5D3 grip on an EOS M3. (It's just to make a point, I recognize what a hot mess that looks like.) The point is this: I like to keep my camera packed in my bag with a lens on it, so the idea that a small grip 'keeps things small' generally only applies if you have the pancake on there or no lens at all (as a second body for travel). So the minute you put even a basically competent EF-M zoom on it (let alone an EF adaptor and bigger lenses), _your space savings of that thin grip are effectively lost_. 

So Canon might be wise to avail themselves of all that front-to-back space and put a chunky SLR grip on it for all the reasons I listed above. 'Small' in mirrorless is a mirage unless you enjoy Canon's comprehensive EF-M pancake lineup... _of one lens_. 

- A


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 6, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> A fixed lens body can bury the lens in there to a somewhat dramatic effect.
> 
> - A



Yes, which is why the new Fuji XF 23mm f/2 lens is actually slightly longer then their 35mm f/2, in whatever case, it will stick out much farther then the integrated lens on the X100 line.


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 6, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> say no to retro. What was necessary, right and possible in the analogue age means nothing but poor ergonomics in digital cameras. And bad looks too. The latter statement is subjective. ;D



Well so is the first statement. 

I enjoy shooting both systems, each have little pluses and minuses when it comes to ergonomics. With the Canon, you need to decide in your head how you are shooting, aperture priority, shutter speed, priority, etc. You set the mode, and the dials/wheels will behave differently depending on the mode you chose. With the "retro"/Fuji, you have dedicated controls for aperture, shutter, even ISO and adjust them as you see fit. Don't care about a certain aspect, leave it in auto. The "mode" is implied at that point. One could (and many do) argue that the retro way is more intuitive.

People have a strong preference to one or the other, I'm equally comfortable and enjoy both sets of ergo/control.

As to this potential M5, I hear a lot of complaining. To me this looks like a natural evolution of the M line, and even more, an M that enthusiasts (like many on this board) can get a little excited about. An EVF? An 80D sensor with greater DR and most importantly DPAF? 

Looks like a nifty little travel cam to this guy. Canon just needs to get the EF-M line going!


----------



## LDS (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



rrcphoto said:


> I'm not saying go full retro like Fuji . because that's simply moronic and removes canon haptics and ergonomics .. but classic AE-1 styling? T90 styling? why not?



The AE-1 was innovative in its use of electronics, but its design was still quite alike the mechanical cameras of the era:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/SLRs/ae1/index1.htm

The A-1 was the first timid step towards a more modern design, with its small "action grip", and the "multi-functional" front dial (one of the firsts you could actually use while looking in the viewfinder):

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/SLRs/a1/html/map.htm

The T90 designed with a lot of inputs from "organic bio-designer" Luigi Colani, inaugurated the actual design of SLRs, which is one of the best things happened to cameras, IMHO. First Canon attempts like the T70 were far inferior.

As much as I like old cameras (and collect some of them), I found retro designs just more cumbersome to handle and use. Although I discovered some novices and less experienced users find them more "friendly", because it's easier to tell and find what dial does what, and what is set to.


----------



## ashmadux (Sep 6, 2016)

Looking forward to the announcement...and the eventual price drop 8)

Also looking forward to:

A heavy-ish metal casing not prone to the shakes/blurry images, ala M3
Return of the full touch interface - the powershot firmware stinks, and is slow as death
ANY third party willing to make a grip - ala M1. M3 had no such option

Not looking forward to:

TERRIBLE decision to again use vertical only flip screen. why bother with this when can just copy the G5's great form factor. That flip screen ROCKS. Vertical screens are useless for vertical shooting. Arghhh.    
battery lockout from 3rd parties- ala M3
weak battery life from evf, canon M batteries
Almost certain to be useless servo+raw


Lets see what happens...

(drum roll..)


----------



## Tugela (Sep 6, 2016)

It looks like a more sensible ergonomic design than the current iterations of the EOS-M series.

However, I suspect that the internal electronics will still have meh performance though. Being cutting edge is not the Canon way sadly.


----------



## Fatfaso (Sep 6, 2016)

Doesn't matter how it looks. It's not going to be a viable option unless Canon makes more dedicated lens for the system. Hard to see Canon focusing on EF-S and EF-M simultaneously.


----------



## docsmith (Sep 6, 2016)

Just thinking about what it would take for me to buy this. I currently have the M1, but do not use it much. Mostly as a backup when traveling and for some instances where I want small. But, as with the 18-55, it isn't pocketable, I am very tempted by the G7X II. 

So, what would get me to buy this camera....battery and AF. It needs to have enough juice to obtain AF quickly when using the adaptor and my EF lenses. If it can't do this, I think I'll go with either the 80D or 7DII as my back up body and G7x as my small camera.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 6, 2016)

ashmadux said:


> A heavy-ish metal casing not prone to the shakes/blurry images, ala M3





You may have a valid point here. I'm beginning to think that the M3 is so light when you mount it on a light tripod the shutter action is enough to cause shake. I'm in the rather ludicrous position of using the M3 on my 17 lb studio tripod to get the best results out of it.


----------



## deleteme (Sep 6, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



7DmkI said:


> Hope it won't be too bulky otherwise it will lose its size advantage.



While a small size is desirable at times it is not necessarily the only advantage of a mirrorless design.
EVF, complete silence and accurate AF are all features that I prize in my mirrorless cameras in addition to their compact size.

The Leica SL did go against the grain in this regard by being quite large. one huge advantage in a larger body is the ability to use a larger battery. The current Achilles heel of mirrorless.

Furthermore, the demand for fast lenses and bigger batteries coupled with the immutability of physics will lead us to a bulkier camera despite starting with a small body.


----------



## DtEW (Sep 6, 2016)

If this incorporates the 80D's DPAF, on-chip ADC sensor (possible) and can drive EF long lenses with an adapter... My (fairly extensive) A6000 kit is going to be up on the market.

(And I can wish for weather sealing, but I won't hold my breath.)


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 6, 2016)

Fatfaso said:


> Doesn't matter how it looks. It's not going to be a viable option unless Canon makes more dedicated lens for the system. Hard to see Canon focusing on EF-S and EF-M simultaneously.



excuse me please, what additional EF-M lenses do you want? o am asking, because i can only think of a missing compact short tele/portrait prime. anything really fast (eg f/1.4) or beyond 200mm or below 15mm would be way to big and is already available as EF/EF-S lens. 

there are 2 EF-M kit zooms, 1 tele zoom, 1 UWA zoom, 1 macro lens and a pancake WA prime. got them all (except 15-45) and am happy with resulting kit for all travel, city, street, outdoor/mountaineering/skiing, landscape, people/events. 

i really do not understand the wish for more EF-M lenses. to
me the problem is entirely the lack of well-featured, technically fully competitive EOS cameras. all i want is a compact A6300 equivalent from canon with EF-M mount up front.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 6, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> excuse me please, what additional EF-M lenses do you want? o am asking, because i can only think of a missing compact short tele/portrait prime. anything really fast (eg f/1.4) or beyond 200mm or below 15mm would be way to big and is already available as EF/EF-S lens.
> 
> there are 2 EF-M kit zooms, 1 tele zoom, 1 UWA zoom, 1 macro lens and a pancake WA prime. got them all (except 15-45) and am happy with resulting kit for all travel, city, street, outdoor/mountaineering/skiing, landscape, people/events.
> 
> ...



Size size size. 'More EF-M lenses please' = more _smallest possible_ EF-M lenses, please. Sure, we an adapt our EF glass, but some of the combinations are unnecessarily large.

Consider these two good examples (below) of when Canon offered an EF-M variant of an EF-S lens -- the aggregate footprint was kept small by the decision to offer these lenses in EF-M. Similar EF-M sized options don't exist for many common lenses, like a nifty fifty equivalent (no, a 28mm f/3.5 macro does not count), a FF 85mm equivalent, etc.

I recognize _*EF-S*_ itself has never been afforded any non-macro / non-pancake primes by Canon, but 24mm-85mm FF equivalent primes for EF-M could be attractively small in comparison.

- A


----------



## asl (Sep 6, 2016)

DtEW said:


> If this incorporates the 80D's DPAF, on-chip ADC sensor (possible) and can drive EF long lenses with an adapter... My (fairly extensive) A6000 kit is going to be up on the market.
> 
> (And I can wish for weather sealing, but I won't hold my breath.)



And a couple of weather sealed M lenses, would be great for landscape
Also not holding my breath, but if Canon went all in with the mirrorless line maybe it could happen.


----------



## ashmadux (Sep 6, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> ashmadux said:
> 
> 
> > A heavy-ish metal casing not prone to the shakes/blurry images, ala M3
> ...







I tested the hell out of them(3), against my trusty M1+Phottix all metal grip.

I put them directly against in other in a host of ultra-normal, non stressful shooting situation with the same lens. The M1 handles all of the same situations like cake. The M3 failed every single comparison. Getting ANY sharp images from the M3 just wasn't happening. Sadder is that even on a tripod, images where 'sharp-ish' at best.

It drove me apeshat bonkers.

Then after an incredibly difficult, HUGE amount of research, I found out that the image problems came from a combo of things:

-body isnt heavy enough
-hard shutter slap induces movement
-24mp sensor is much more sensitive to ANY movement, so much higher shutter speeds are needed to get sharp images.

Mix those together and its a sharpness disaster. The last point was the death note, because I use my M1 in many low shutter needed situations. There was no way i'd be able to use a body that required high shutter speeds at all times without keeping my iso way up there.


Sad to let it go, but was basically unusable for me.


----------



## Ditboy (Sep 7, 2016)

Overall this looks to answer some of my ergonomic problems I've had with the M3. When the G5 first came out, I checked it out hands-on and was pleased and thought it is how Canon would go. Just slightly bigger and shaped so that my grip doesn't activate the Menu button each time I grip it. (Solved that problem with a leather half case- extended the corner just enough) Post lugs-Thank you!!! I have never like the strap lugs, they don't allow much of a choice. I like straps that can be taken off or to have the ability to have several straps for different situations. 

EF-M lenses. I really would like Canon to make some fast primes, but I don't see it. Those who say they would be as big as EF-S or EF lenses have never held any fast Rokinon primes. I just bought the Zhongyi Mitakon Speedmaster 35mm f 0.95 and while heavy for it's size, it is nowhere close to what the EF 50mm f 1.2L is, and a stop faster! I basically have two sets of lenses for the M3, the Canon lenses for use during the daylight, and the fast primes I use all the rest of time. 

My biggest hopes are that Canon gives it the menu system of the xxD cameras. I use the M3 about 75% of the time over my 6D and 70D or a pool 7D mk2. Small, light and good IQ. The times I bring out the DSLR's is when I need speed. Whether, focus tracking or constantly changing situations. It is painfully slow to change anything in the menus, and there are several menu items that the xxD series have that are not there. Not being able to include "Format Card" in the" favorites" menu? Stupid! Not being able to turn off exposure simulation? Dumb. Keeps me from being able to use the M3 in the studio with strobes. You can use Canon's TTL, but then I have to take off the EVF-DC1. Really would like 1/8000 top end and 1/250 flash synch too so I can really use those fast primes wide open...

The nice thing is Canon is showing the world that the M line is here to stay, which will give confidence to third party lens makers to include the EF-M mounts in their lineups. Lots of lenses for APS-C cameras for Sony and Fuji that I would jump at the opportunity to buy, to help prove to Canon that EF-M lenses should be expanded. By the start of 2017, I very well could be adding the Rokinon 21mm f1.4 and the 50mm f1.2 to the 12mm f2 I already have, the Speedmaster 35mm f0.95 and the Canon FD 85 1.2 with adaptor. 5 really fast primes that would be in my bag forever and still not weigh as much as the 70-200 2.8L IS. If the M5 has enough horsepower to maintain live view for several FPS like the a6300 or Fuji X-t2, I will not look back...


----------



## dlee13 (Sep 7, 2016)

ashmadux said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > ashmadux said:
> ...



Here I am thinking it was just me.

I find I have no issues using the kit lens and getting sharp images when IS is on, but with other EF lenses I have struggled. I'm too used to holding it up against my head to stabilze it so not having an EVF makes it hard for me to hold such a light body still.


----------



## rocketsurgeon (Sep 7, 2016)

*Re: Is This The Canon EOS M5?*



neuroanatomist said:


> Canon is *******. :



Nah, I think they'll be ok.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

i cannot imagine Canon bringing big+expensive fast f/1.4, f/1.2 or f/0.95 EF-M lenses. EF-M is a crop sensor image circle, just like EF-S. it gets those consumer (!) lenses, that are mostly used and can fully utilize size advantage of short flange distance. even i understand and agree with that decision by Canon. ;-)

mirrorless Canon "L" lenses will come, but only once Canon finally recognizes that mirrorslappers definitely have no future and finally launches their FF-sensor mirrorless system line ... whenever that may be. those new native "EF-X" lenses will replace EF lenses and mount. just like sony FE replaced sony A-mount lenses (although sony to date still refuses to officially admit this). EF-M like EF-S and sony E-mount will aleays be a limited lens line for crop sensor cameras, optimized for compact size and affordable prices. canon will (have to) follow the same path taken by sony. 

luckily the transition from EF to EF-X will be much less painful than FD to EF was. thanks to the shorter flange distance, all existing EF lenses will remaim fully useable via very simple snd cheap adapters, like the EF/EF-M adapter. 

for a kick-ass Canon FF mirrorless cam i would be prepared to buy lenses as expensive as today's EF L-glass. for a crop sensor system i will never consider lenses costing a grand or more. one of many teasons why i wont even consider buying Fuji stuff.


----------



## lw (Sep 7, 2016)

Looks very much like a Panasonic GH4 (soon to be GH5)
Could well end up being very similar in size too.

I image that the choice will be relatively straightforward for some.
APS-C vs 4K

http://camerasize.com/compact/#525,599,448,ha,f


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

wow GH4 size would be way too behemoth for my use. looks 5D mirrorslapper size if the image really is to scale.


----------



## lw (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> wow GH4 size would be way too behemoth for my use. looks 5D mirrorslapper size if the image really is to scale.



I imagine SL1 size would be most likely. The GH4 certainly is big for a 43rds. But needs room for 4K cooling.

If as suggested by some that lens on the 'sketch' is the EF-M 22mm then the camera will be smallish.


----------



## riker (Sep 7, 2016)

OMG nooooooooo.
WTF?! Canon doesn't give a sht about Sony for years, then starts the M line as a different product line, no EVF, small body (great idea)...then finally starting to make better body (M3) and slowly  adding new lenses...we are just about to get there with M5 (we thought at least)...
...and then they change their mind and make a body which is basically a copy of the Sony a7 series???
Adding crapy EVF (sorry but EVF is still sht compared to optical), making it bigger, loosing the size advantage, but still beeing crapy APS-C compared to FF a7 which even has TONS more lenses.
This is madness!!!
Listen Canon, M3 was a good direction just make it better and make lenses like the 70-200/4 for APS-C and EF-M.
U did a great job with the 11-22 and the 22/2.
(Or make it FF as many would like it but u never dare to be that innovative or revolutionary.)


----------



## Woody (Sep 7, 2016)

I'll repeat what I said earlier:

I love what I'm seeing. 

Size doesn't matter, the A6300 camera is too small to hold properly anyway.

Just make sure it's light-weight, ~ 400 g.

Most importantly, it must offer DPAF (with AF servo tracking) and touchscreen.

Gimme EF-M 35 mm f/1.4 lens and I'm super happy. Otherwise, I'm alright with current lenses.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Fatfaso said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't matter how it looks. It's not going to be a viable option unless Canon makes more dedicated lens for the system. Hard to see Canon focusing on EF-S and EF-M simultaneously.
> ...



Obviously he wants an EF-M 85mm f/2.4 IS STM. Doesn't everyone?


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Fatfaso said:
> ...





I really wonder, how many of those wanting "more EF-M lenses" would be willing to pay USD/€ 1000+ for fast, big, heavy EF-M "L" lenses ... 
*limited to crop sensor use only*
* limited to on one single camera system only*
* limited to use with consumer-oriented camera bodies only*
I'd consider those folks either masochist ... or stupid.  

Before I go and spend € 1500 on an APS-C only lens like an 85mm/1.2 or € 1000+ on some weirdo chinese manual focus f/0.95 lens I will much rather buy an A7R II (in the absence of a Canon equivalent) plus adapter and put an affordable Sigma 85/1.4 or something like it in front ... for even more subject isolation and "king of darkness stuff". 

For shallow DOF and low/available light work an FF system is the only sensible way to go - both technically and economically. Totally beyond me, why some people keep calling for "fast" EF-M lenses.


----------



## hachu21 (Sep 7, 2016)

riker said:


> OMG nooooooooo.
> WTF?!



Maybe Canon will go the route they followed with the GxX line : 1 body small (G7X/G9X), 1 body more ergo oriented with a nice EVF (G5X).

Meaning, the M3 could still get an update even if the M5 is released.


----------



## lw (Sep 7, 2016)

hachu21 said:


> riker said:
> 
> 
> > OMG nooooooooo.
> ...



The original rumour steming from the Russian Certification site is for 2 new Ms.
This thread has been all about what is assumed to be the higher end of the 2, but little has been discussed about what the other one's spec is


----------



## Haydn1971 (Sep 7, 2016)

Re the more primes thing... I don't expect super fast f1.2 and greater lens, what I what is a few extra choices in a package mostly like the 22mm, but I'd accept a faster than f1.8 ef-m prime no larger than a 18-55mm ef-m

So, something wider of at least
Maybe a 15mm f2.8 about the size of the 15-45mm max
The 22mm & 28mm we have
35mm f1.4 no bigger than a 18-55mm and/or
35mm f1.8-2.0 pancake
55mm f1.4 IS no bigger than a 18-55mm
60-70mm f2.8mm IS no bigger than a 18-55mm that doubles as a macro/portrait type solution


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 7, 2016)

hachu21 said:


> riker said:
> 
> 
> > OMG nooooooooo.
> ...



M3 → M5 (↑)
M10 → M20 (↓?)


----------



## Crosswind (Sep 7, 2016)

quick wheel/button description of M5 sketch. Please correct me if you think that some assignment may be wrong.
edit: looks like there's a flash icon on the bottom of the backside (5 button-)wheel.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 7, 2016)

Haydn1971 said:


> Re the more primes thing... I don't expect super fast f1.2 and greater lens, what I what is a few extra choices in a package mostly like the 22mm, but I'd accept a faster than f1.8 ef-m prime no larger than a 18-55mm ef-m
> 
> So, something wider of at least
> Maybe a 15mm f2.8 about the size of the 15-45mm max
> ...


I need cheap efs/efm 15-80mm f2.8-4.0 is stm lens.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

Haydn1971 said:


> Re the more primes thing... I don't expect super fast f1.2 and greater lens, what I what is a few extra choices in a package mostly like the 22mm, but I'd accept a faster than f1.8 ef-m prime no larger than a 18-55mm ef-m
> 
> So, something wider of at least
> Maybe a 15mm f2.8 about the size of the 15-45mm max
> ...



ok, I see where you are. 

I doubt, f/1.4 lenses could be made "good, small and affordable" enough to somehow fit into EF-M line ...

* 35/2.0 pancake should be sizewise and pricewise easy; but f/1.4 size + PRICE !?

* 15mm/f 2.8 sized not larger than 15-45 sounds doable, but unlikely to be optically any better than the excellent 11-22 which might be around f/4.5 at 15mm? Is f/2.8 really needed in UWA lens? Except astro maybe ... for which APS-C is not good solution anyway

* 55/1.4 IS ... we don't even have one in EF mount yet ... ask ahsanford ;D ;-) ... sizewise maybe yes. But number of people willing to pay € 800+ for a crop-only 55/1.4 ? What I could imagine is a EF-M version of 50/1.8 STM, would fit very well into EF-M line. 

* 60-70/2.8 IS - sizewise probably possible. Price maybe 400 - could fit into EF-M range. 

I still hope for a very compact EF-M 85mm f/2.4 IS STM at around 500 ? ... that's the one I'd buy, especially if there were also a wortwhile new EOS M body to to attach it to.


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 7, 2016)

I think a few people around here need to take a deep breath, relax, and maybe consider switching to decaf. 

I don't get the EVF hate? OVF isn't practical/terribly useful being it is mirrorless, especially as a more compact size. And every other M camera Canon has is void of any viewfinder. So buy an M10 if you want the small EVF-less body. And let those who'll trade a big larger size camera for an EVF buy this new one.

And where's all the hate for Canon developing some more EF-M glass coming from? With the short flange distance and smaller image circle it doesn't require all that much glass to get some decent f/2 even a few f/1.4 primes in the standard focal lengths (A 35mm f/1.4 should be relatively small). They won't be anywhere near the size of their EF counterparts, which makes adapting current EF lenses via adapter fairly clumsy in most cases. Frankly anyone who thinks the lens lineup is good as is doesn't know any better and certainly not taking a look at the competition.

I'm looking forward to seeing the real thing. I'm taking the optimistic approach and am going to believe this will be a very decent camera. I like to think it will be the start of Canon starting to invest a bit into the M line and giving the market some higher end options there. If the M5 is as good as I'm hoping, I expect it will only be a matter of time before we see some faster EF-M primes to accompany this more "up market" camera.


----------



## A-PeeR (Sep 7, 2016)

ashmadux said:


> I tested the hell out of them(3), against my trusty M1+Phottix all metal grip.
> 
> I put them directly against in other in a host of ultra-normal, non stressful shooting situation with the same lens. The M1 handles all of the same situations like cake. The M3 failed every single comparison. Getting ANY sharp images from the M3 just wasn't happening. Sadder is that even on a tripod, images where 'sharp-ish' at best.
> 
> ...




I was under the impression that the M3 (all Canon cameras with live view for that matter) has EFCS. If that's the case, is shutter shock the culprit?


----------



## hachu21 (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Before I go and spend € 1500 on an APS-C only lens like an 85mm/1.2 or € 1000+ on some weirdo chinese manual focus f/0.95 lens I will much rather buy an A7R II (in the absence of a Canon equivalent) plus adapter and put an affordable Sigma 85/1.4 or something like it in front ... for even more subject isolation and "king of darkness stuff".
> 
> For shallow DOF and low/available light work an FF system is the only sensible way to go - both technically and economically. Totally beyond me, why some people keep calling for "fast" EF-M lenses.


It seems that there's a real market for high-end lens limited to "small" sensors. Olympus "Pro" range is expending (3 new lenses to be announced soon) and all that expensive Fuji-X lenses seems tto sell as well.

Granted that Canon has A FF market to protect, but the lenses size advantage is real (especially with µ4/3).
On the other hand, the lenses size/weight advantage with mirorless FF is barely noticeable.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

hachu21 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Before I go and spend € 1500 on an APS-C only lens like an 85mm/1.2 or € 1000+ on some weirdo chinese manual focus f/0.95 lens I will much rather buy an A7R II (in the absence of a Canon equivalent) plus adapter and put an affordable Sigma 85/1.4 or something like it in front ... for even more subject isolation and "king of darkness stuff".
> ...



well, philosophies differ. I prefer larger-sensor cameras with smaller, less-fast, cheaper lenses to get a certain capability rather than buying a small-sensored camera with really expensive glass. Typoically I have 1 or 2 cameras, but many more lenses.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 7, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > excuse me please, what additional EF-M lenses do you want?
> ...



Pancakes for everyone!

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 7, 2016)

ahsanford said:


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



LOL ... the image..


----------



## Haydn1971 (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> I doubt, f/1.4 lenses could be made "good, small and affordable" enough to somehow fit into EF-M line ...



Samyang seem to be able to build good manual lenses at f1.2 at the right size for EF-M, so I'm not entirely convinced that Canon couldn't do f1.4 for EF-M, the market is perhaps too small globally for such thing.

Take a read of Dustin's excellent reviews on the Samyang lenses...

http://dustinabbott.net/2016/03/rokinon-50mm-f1-2-as-umc-review/


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

well, if you prefer, call it not a *pancake*, but a *stack* ;D
EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS 8) 

Of course, we are talking AUTOFOCUS lenses, not manual old clunkers or aperture rings ...

Pentax does it. http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/k/telephoto/
If Canon were SMART, they should follow. 

APS-C (crop 1.5x) 70mm, f/2.4, D x L: 63 x 26mm, 131 grams 






Full Frame 135 (36x24mm sensor), 77mm f/1.8, D x L 64 x 48 mm, 270 grams (including unnecessary aperture ring )


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

Haydn1971 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt, f/1.4 lenses could be made "good, small and affordable" enough to somehow fit into EF-M line ...
> ...



the last piece of gear on earth *I would buy* is a f/1.2 crop lens with manual focus. No way! :

That Rokinon 50/1.2 weights in at 385 grams and is D X L 67,5 x 74 mm. It weighs 1.5x times as much and is longer than the combination of the wonderful, optically excellent, fully FF-capable and dirt-cheap Canon EF 50/1.8 *with EF-M/EF adapter [D x L 69.2 x 67.3 mm]. I will take f/1.8 with AF any day over f/1.2 without AF. And for my use, DOF is more than shallow enough at f/1.8, often I stop it down to f/2.8. 

I have the EF 50/1.8 STM and use it sometimes on my M / 1st gen in small stage concerts. Combo has a very manageable size, weight and handling. AF of course is rather slow and cumbersome in low light, but that's M's fault, not lens or adapter.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> the last piece of gear on earth *I would buy* is a f/1.2 crop lens with manual focus. No way! :
> 
> That Rokinon 50/1.2 weights in at 385 grams and is D X L 67,5 x 74 mm. It weighs 1.5x times as much and is longer than the combination of the wonderful, optically excellent, fully FF-capable and dirt-cheap Canon EF 50/1.8 *with EF-M/EF adapter [D x L 69.2 x 67.3 mm]. I will take f/1.8 with AF any day over f/1.2 without AF. And for my use, DOF is more than shallow enough at f/1.8, often I stop it down to f/2.8.
> 
> I have the EF 50/1.8 STM and use it sometimes on my M / 1st gen in small stage concerts. Combo has a very manageable size, weight and handling. AF of course is rather slow and cumbersome in low light, but that's M's fault, not lens or adapter.



All this talk of 50 primes has got me hungry.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> All this talk of 50 primes has got me hungry.



Want to guess, which 50/1.4 Canon makes first? EF or EF-M ? Extra points, if you guess the correct year/s too.  ;D


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > All this talk of 50 primes has got me hungry.
> ...



If _EF-M_ gets a Canon-made 50 f/1.4 (even without USM or IS) before the venerable EF 50 f/1.4 USM gets replaced, I will sell all my gear and go live in a teepee in Lapland. 

- A


----------



## crashpc (Sep 7, 2016)

It would be very nice to have fast nativ glass from 10mm to 50mm, but pat thisf FL, I would not mind to use EF glass really.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> well, if you prefer, call it not a *pancake*, but a *stack* ;D
> EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS 8)
> 
> Of course, we are talking AUTOFOCUS lenses, not manual old clunkers or aperture rings ...
> ...



The lens you want Canon to copy does have an aperture ring and uses clunky old screw drive (from the camera body) for AF.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 7, 2016)

crashpc said:


> It would be very nice to have fast nativ glass from 10mm to 50mm, but pat thisf FL, I would not mind to use EF glass really.



+1. Yep. Somewhere north of perhaps 85mm, the small size upside of native EF-M glass on the aggregate size of the rig is lost and you might as well bolt on a fully-featured EF lens.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> The lens you want Canon to copy does have an aperture ring and uses clunky old screw drive (from the camera body) for AF.



oops, sorry! wrong picture for the first Pentax lens. Should be this one ...

HD PENTAX-DA 70mm F2.4 Limited (APS-C) 





Pentax 77/1.8 has an aperture ring. Not needed on Canon of course. Would save another 30 grams and 2 bucks. Plastics barrel would be fine as well. And STM AF drive, of course. No screwdriver needed. ;D

That Pentax 77mm/2.4 has a tiny 49mm filter thread! An EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM could come with a 58mm filter thread, have brilliant IQ and would be fully in line with current EF-M lenses (all have same outer diameter). 
That would be SMART, Canon.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> That would be SMART, Canon.



perhaps, but it's not as easy as you make it out to be.

for starters, they are working with a K mount registration distance which is even more than the EF mount.

secondly, the optics of those lenses are pentax's own. it's unlikely canon has similar patents so just because Pentax did it, doesn't mean canon to do it.


----------



## Rocky (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > The lens you want Canon to copy does have an aperture ring and uses clunky old screw drive (from the camera body) for AF.
> ...


After adding on the length of the "adapter". it will not be that small.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

Ok, Canon: I´ll also take an EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM if it is as HUGE as the EF-M 18-55 kit lens.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 7, 2016)

Just skimming through the comments thus far, it is safe to assume that when "stupid Canon" releases a camera that is not a "mirror slapper" it *still* won't make people happy.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

unfocused said:


> Just skimming through the comments thus far, it is safe to assume that when "stupid Canon" releases a camera that is not a "mirror slapper" it *still* won't make people happy.



absolutely correct! It needs to be a fully competitive, kick-ass mirrorless camera and system. And Canon should just build 3 variations to satisfy - nearly? - everybody: 
* as small and powerful as possible without video ... for myself 
* some stills capability and full-blown 4k video, peaking, zebras, microphone jacks, C-log, S-Log, 101 codecs ... for the video folks
* and one version "with everything" in it in a Texas size body ... for Americans with big hands. 
Simple, Canon! 
;D


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Just skimming through the comments thus far, it is safe to assume that when "stupid Canon" releases a camera that is not a "mirror slapper" it *still* won't make people happy.
> ...



not sure why people think canon can easily do 4K video.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 7, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> not sure why people think canon can easily do 4K video.



if Sony, Pany and others can do it, why should know-it-all-best Canon not be able to? Were in late 2016, not 2006.


----------



## lw (Sep 7, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> not sure why people think canon can easily do 4K video.



Whether it is done 'easily' or not, Canon do need to start keeping up with the Jones.

It will be the odd one out of this list of Companies with non-FF 4K bodies - Sony, Samgung, Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus (soon). Reasonably priced too (i.e. don't require a pro's budget)

In this day and age, and in view of that list of competitors, there is absolutely no reason why someone shouldn't have a realistic expectation that a market leader like Canon should be on that list, given it has plenty of other 4K products and experience.

Of course 4K isn't high on everyone's requirements. But for those like me where it where it is, Canon's lack of reasonably priced 4K cameras leaves them scratching their head.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > not sure why people think canon can easily do 4K video.
> ...



canon's camera DiGiC's are lagging behind the times. I'm not even sure it's something that is easily correctable without major architecture changes with DiGiC. TBH.

the last there was any mention of canon's internal DiGiC they were based upon Ti architecture, which is still at 1080 for internal video.

it's why for instance the 4K and the 1080p in the 1DX and the 5D are distinctly different in terms of codecs and pipelining. canon "hacked" in 4K.


correcting this a bit: TI can process 4K .. however the power envelope doesn't seem that great, as their solution kits are all requiring heat sinks and fans to dissipate heat.

It could be that canon has to move to another ARM supplier and DSP supplier to get efficient h.264/5 processing on their SoC's and I'm sure that's not exactly "an easy" task.

However with 8K support needed before 2020, maybe canon is skipping 4k entirely from a urgency point of view? who knows.


----------



## riker (Sep 7, 2016)

hachu21 said:


> riker said:
> 
> 
> > OMG nooooooooo.
> ...



May these words be of the prophet within you.


----------



## Ebrahim Saadawi (Sep 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> not sure why people think canon can easily do 4K video.



if Sony, Pany and others can do it, why should know-it-all-best Canon not be able to? Were in late 2016, not 2006.
[/quote]

Sony cannot do it. (in m3 discussion here). The Sony camera that has the same size and weight.

-A6300. 

Which offers 4K video. Sony engineers were instructed by the marketing team to simply sensor to read full 4K and compress it to H.264 regardless of how the hardware can handle that amount of power. The hardware, cannot. The hardware fries up. Is that a story of a successful ''Sony can do 4K so why Canon don't?''. 

No, Sony cannot. They have at most a beta experimental mode for 4K that cannot be used in any serious shooting, and the bigger problem is that whilst doing so, they made aweful 1080p. So with the belived almighty sony video champ, when yoy actually go out and shoot with it, you can't use 4K for it's un-managed heat generation, and the reliable mode is absolutely horrendous (they d90 video, a6000 HD is MUCH better). So you end up with a camera that can't shoot video! 

-Panasonic and other m43s companies have much, smaller sensors. The GH4 video champ has a chip to read and write that's a quarter of a 5D size chip, yet people wonder why can panaonic do it and 5D can't. And even further, the panasonic takes a crop of that small sensor even further for 4K! 

-The current examples shown by all camera manufacturers prove one thing: 4K is a major heat problem, proportional to sensor size and camera size/venting, 

4K can be ok with a m43s 2.3x croo in a larg DSLR sized body. GH4

4K is NOT ok with a small mirrorless APS-C body. Sony proves that. And Canon publicly stated that the implementation of 4K is resrticted by heat management and we need to work on that (interview with Masaya Maedya almost a year before 5DIV was announced)

4K FF in a large 1DC/1Dx body is ok (ok meaning absolute, zero glith reliability). 

Not so ok in small mirrorless cameras or DSLRs: (NIKON has to take an aps-c crop on the D5 (And it's a 1D size body). Sony has to take an APS-C crop also in the a7rii, (but keeps a very primitive line skipped FF 4k mode) and the cameras overheat seriously in 4k.

People ask why Sony 1'' rx1000 can do 4k and Canon g7x can't, don't realize it shoots 5 minutes and cools for 5 to 10 minutes to take another shot). Don't just compare a spec line, USE IT AND SEE IF IT WORKS. 


Point is, if you look at all the world's camera manufacturers, 4K heat is a real crippling thing. And if you're a company that doesn't introduce a feature until it's 100% reliable, then you keep waiting and making technological advances to solve the problem, or simply make a side linr of 4K cameras with fans and active cooling. 

****A worthy note. The ONLY company, in the ENTIRE world of video production, that could solve 4K problem coming off large chip in a small camera is wait for it, 

..
..
..
..
..

SAMSUNG!

NX1 takes a semi 8K sensor readout (!!!!!) (30.1 mp) and downscales it to 4K in-camera, in real time, Full APS-C sensor, zero cropm and compress to a demanding codec (h.264), all without giving a hint of failure even under Middle East frying weather. So hat's off to Samung for being the first company to do that. This capability (large sensor downscale to 4k and compress that huge data to HEVC or send out to HDMI at 4:2:2 is why cinema cameras are so large and require running fans and even water cooling, yet Samsung seems to have neated a weatger sealed tiny package that can do it! I think it's most likely due to their advanced technological know-how from phones and other devices?

This was just a piece of info. 

Another piece of info, Canon will not make 4K video either crop or 4k unlss it's absolutely reliable and can be used just as is. Until then they'll continue pushing FULL HD cameras.

This is the only feature Canon is always accused of crippling but actually is not. They can't do it.

Do they cripple and withhold other features, ABSOLUTELY. I want Zebras and peaking in a large EVF in my M5 with dual slots and fast buffer to keep up with DPAF ecosystem. But no, Canon wants me to only take a smallish EVF without peaking and a single slow SD card slot. I want a full swivle LCD , but no, Canon wants me to get only small vertical movements. I want C-Log even at HD. But no, you don't get that. OK I want the XLR module of the XC15 to work on my m5 to shoot good HD video with high-end sound like Sony offers with their XLR module, but no, you only get a 3.5mm input with 2008 5d2 preamp noise. Lots of crippling is going on, but 4k isn't one of them. 

Let's hope they don't cripple DR (by using the Rebel 24mp Hybrid AF III chip vs the 80D 24mp DPAF chip, which are similar but the later has a huge advantage in dynamic range and a good improvement in AF). Since this would be my landscape camera (with manual glass) and my social portrait camera (with the 50mm 1.8 STM) I really hope they go with the 80D chip so I could push up shadows better (a weakness of all my current Canon cameras, gorgeous mids and highs range but sea of red noise down there). I don't want to be facing that any more. 

Something i would really appreciate is a 50mm IS EF-M. Or any stabilized primes for that matter. Because m3 has AWESOME electronic video stabilizstion that works magic, nothing like any electronic system I"ve seen, and when combined with an IS lens it's a mindblowing compensation for camera shake. You can make moving shots that would be impissible to do without enormous gear.


----------



## riker (Sep 7, 2016)

Woody said:


> I'll repeat what I said earlier:
> 
> Size doesn't matter, the A6300 camera is too small to hold properly anyway.
> 
> ...



Sorry man, I strongly disagree. And I'm the person who is using vertical grip for better _horizontal_ holding on every camera for the past 12 years, even on 5Dmk3 now.
A small/compact camera (like the M series so far) is not about comfortable grip with heavy lenses, not about long battery life, etc...it's about being small and compact. That's what it is!
If you have huge hands, or dislike small cameras or whatever, and size is not a problem, then just simply use a DSLR, the SL1, 80D, 5D, 1D, etc...there's a great selection in sizes and u don't even need to invest in EF-M lenses unnecessarily, already got EF and EF-S. And you also don't need to have unrealistic dreams about high aperture EF-M lenses. Everything you need already exists. The M line is a rival (or at least wanna be) to the a6000 series - if that's not your thing, the M isn't either.

What we need is something that still doesn't exist and that is a really compact gear set which is pretty capable.
(Yes, the dream would be having L class EF-M lenses but that's not going to happen we all know. We never received high class EF-S lenses either.)

On a sidenote, I never understood the a7 size/weight hype...yea the body itself is awesome, OK...but the lenses are the same weight (sometimes even heavier than Canon), so as soon as you have a set of 3-4 lenses with your body, flash, tripod, etc, you basically have no advantage at all.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 7, 2016)

riker said:


> hachu21 said:
> 
> 
> > riker said:
> ...



with the new EVF-DC2 maybe there will be a M3 II?

so basically mirroring the three Gx lines?

G9x - M10
G7x - M3
G5x - M5?


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 7, 2016)

Is this actually the G1X III as reported on several other sites?


----------



## 1kind (Sep 7, 2016)

powershot2012 said:


> Is this actually the G1X III as reported on several other sites?


What? Where you read that? No. The photoshopped image has a lens button to remove the lens. The G1 X Mark II is a fixed lens.


----------



## crashpc (Sep 8, 2016)

... and the lens for G1X would have larger front element size. That is definitely not the G1X series cam.


----------



## rs (Sep 8, 2016)

powershot2012 said:


> Is this actually the G1X III as reported on several other sites?


The image clearly has the EF-M 22 lens mounted. So no.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 8, 2016)

Ebrahim Saadawi said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > not sure why people think canon can easily do 4K video.
> ...



Sony cannot do it. (in m3 discussion here). The Sony camera that has the same size and weight.

-A6300. 

Which offers 4K video. Sony engineers were instructed by the marketing team to simply sensor to read full 4K and compress it to H.264 regardless of how the hardware can handle that amount of power. The hardware, cannot. The hardware fries up. Is that a story of a successful ''Sony can do 4K so why Canon don't?''. 

No, Sony cannot. They have at most a beta experimental mode for 4K that cannot be used in any serious shooting, and the bigger problem is that whilst doing so, they made aweful 1080p. So with the belived almighty sony video champ, when yoy actually go out and shoot with it, you can't use 4K for it's un-managed heat generation, and the reliable mode is absolutely horrendous (they d90 video, a6000 HD is MUCH better). So you end up with a camera that can't shoot video! 

-Panasonic and other m43s companies have much, smaller sensors. The GH4 video champ has a chip to read and write that's a quarter of a 5D size chip, yet people wonder why can panaonic do it and 5D can't. And even further, the panasonic takes a crop of that small sensor even further for 4K! 

-The current examples shown by all camera manufacturers prove one thing: 4K is a major heat problem, proportional to sensor size and camera size/venting, 

4K can be ok with a m43s 2.3x croo in a larg DSLR sized body. GH4

4K is NOT ok with a small mirrorless APS-C body. Sony proves that. And Canon publicly stated that the implementation of 4K is resrticted by heat management and we need to work on that (interview with Masaya Maedya almost a year before 5DIV was announced)

4K FF in a large 1DC/1Dx body is ok (ok meaning absolute, zero glith reliability). 

Not so ok in small mirrorless cameras or DSLRs: (NIKON has to take an aps-c crop on the D5 (And it's a 1D size body). Sony has to take an APS-C crop also in the a7rii, (but keeps a very primitive line skipped FF 4k mode) and the cameras overheat seriously in 4k.

People ask why Sony 1'' rx1000 can do 4k and Canon g7x can't, don't realize it shoots 5 minutes and cools for 5 to 10 minutes to take another shot). Don't just compare a spec line, USE IT AND SEE IF IT WORKS. 


Point is, if you look at all the world's camera manufacturers, 4K heat is a real crippling thing. And if you're a company that doesn't introduce a feature until it's 100% reliable, then you keep waiting and making technological advances to solve the problem, or simply make a side linr of 4K cameras with fans and active cooling. 

****A worthy note. The ONLY company, in the ENTIRE world of video production, that could solve 4K problem coming off large chip in a small camera is wait for it, 

..
..
..
..
..

SAMSUNG!

NX1 takes a semi 8K sensor readout (!!!!!) (30.1 mp) and downscales it to 4K in-camera, in real time, Full APS-C sensor, zero cropm and compress to a demanding codec (h.264), all without giving a hint of failure even under Middle East frying weather. So hat's off to Samung for being the first company to do that. This capability (large sensor downscale to 4k and compress that huge data to HEVC or send out to HDMI at 4:2:2 is why cinema cameras are so large and require running fans and even water cooling, yet Samsung seems to have neated a weatger sealed tiny package that can do it! I think it's most likely due to their advanced technological know-how from phones and other devices?

This was just a piece of info. 

Another piece of info, Canon will not make 4K video either crop or 4k unlss it's absolutely reliable and can be used just as is. Until then they'll continue pushing FULL HD cameras.

This is the only feature Canon is always accused of crippling but actually is not. They can't do it.

Do they cripple and withhold other features, ABSOLUTELY. I want Zebras and peaking in a large EVF in my M5 with dual slots and fast buffer to keep up with DPAF ecosystem. But no, Canon wants me to only take a smallish EVF without peaking and a single slow SD card slot. I want a full swivle LCD , but no, Canon wants me to get only small vertical movements. I want C-Log even at HD. But no, you don't get that. OK I want the XLR module of the XC15 to work on my m5 to shoot good HD video with high-end sound like Sony offers with their XLR module, but no, you only get a 3.5mm input with 2008 5d2 preamp noise. Lots of crippling is going on, but 4k isn't one of them. 

Let's hope they don't cripple DR (by using the Rebel 24mp Hybrid AF III chip vs the 80D 24mp DPAF chip, which are similar but the later has a huge advantage in dynamic range and a good improvement in AF). Since this would be my landscape camera (with manual glass) and my social portrait camera (with the 50mm 1.8 STM) I really hope they go with the 80D chip so I could push up shadows better (a weakness of all my current Canon cameras, gorgeous mids and highs range but sea of red noise down there). I don't want to be facing that any more. 

Something i would really appreciate is a 50mm IS EF-M. Or any stabilized primes for that matter. Because m3 has AWESOME electronic video stabilizstion that works magic, nothing like any electronic system I"ve seen, and when combined with an IS lens it's a mindblowing compensation for camera shake. You can make moving shots that would be impissible to do without enormous gear.
[/quote]


Your logic is simple, Canon Tech lags behind Sony & Pany. How can u expect eosm prime is stablized if L lens not stablized? 

And Canon M3 doesnt have any electronic video stabilizstion, highly doubt that u have been cheated. :'(


----------



## Ebrahim Saadawi (Sep 8, 2016)

pokerz said:


> Ebrahim Saadawi said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...




Your logic is simple, Canon Tech lags behind Sony & Pany. How can u expect eosm prime is stablized if L lens not stablized? 

And Canon M3 doesnt have any electronic video stabilizstion, highly doubt that u have been cheated. :'(
[/quote]


----------



## warrior (Sep 8, 2016)

Im strongly choosing between eos m5 and lumix g8 / g80. I need it mostly for video.


----------



## Snzkgb (Sep 8, 2016)

Searching for the small Canon ILC as an everyday camera, M5 might be exactly what I need, because three 2.8 L zooms and 5d2 body+grip are too heavy to always get them with myself.


----------



## lw (Sep 8, 2016)

warrior said:


> Im strongly choosing between eos m5 and lumix g8 / g80. I need it mostly for video.



G8 looks decent from the rumours. 
The smaller sensor is not so much an issue for video - not when you get in-body dual IS, full tilt and swivel screen & 4K.
So you get a wide choice of lenses all of which can be stabilized. And likely decent video capabilities (not just 4K).

However, you are going to lose quite a bit for stills if you compare the performance of the 16mp 43rds sensor against the 80D's 24mp APS-C sensor (and the M5 may even improve on that) https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=panasonic_dmcgx85&attr13_1=canon_eosm3&attr13_2=panasonic_dmcgx8&attr13_3=canon_eos80d&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=1600&attr16_1=1600&attr16_2=1600&attr16_3=1600&attr171_0=on&attr171_2=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.05483720930232557&y=0.3366920355114864


----------



## Tugela (Sep 8, 2016)

pokerz said:


> Ebrahim Saadawi said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...




Your logic is simple, Canon Tech lags behind Sony & Pany. How can u expect eosm prime is stablized if L lens not stablized? 

And Canon M3 doesnt have any electronic video stabilizstion, highly doubt that u have been cheated. :'(
[/quote]

Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor. Samsung has the best processor, followed by Panasonic. Sony are a bit behind those two (they admit it, and it is the reason why their cameras overheat under some conditions). Nikon are a distant fourth and Canon even further behind them.

Canon can't produce a camera that can do 4K using hardware compression without a fan because of that. The processor simply gets to hot. And even with the inefficient software encoding they use instead, they still have to do a crop otherwise their processors can't handle the data throughput.

You will not see (IMO) a Canon DSLR or MILC doing 4K with H.264 encoding until at least the next generation of processors is released, which would be Digic 8. Digic 7 likely has a 4K encoder on the chip (since it is a version of the DV5), but it just gets too hot to use without a fan, so is impractical for a hybrid. This is probably the reason the Digic 7 was not used in the 1DXII and 5D4. So, late 2017 or early 2018 at the earliest I think.

Because of the frequency of camera updates in the EOS world, the first Canon camera that can truly do proper 4K unimpeded by compromises will be the 7D3, 6D2 or 90D (possibly even a Rebel)

BUT, by the time Canon gets there, Sony/Panasonic will also have moved to next generation processors, and they will be even further down the road.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Sep 8, 2016)

Going back to lenses... I was looking at the Fuji and Sony E ranges this morning and was at first dazzled by the fact that Fuji has just one lens under the price range of the Canon EF-M range... That's clearly where they have an Achilles heel in terms of consumer adopters, compared to Canon. Sony E is rather interesting that there is a lens for lens match in the EF-M range, notable exceptions being the 16mm pancake and a native 50mm, which the EF 50mm f1.8 STM probably fills to a degree... 

So where now for Canon, all I see after the 18-1xx is a move upmarket in further lenses, but to enable that, Canon needs a higher end model, i.e. A range, so we currently have the M10 & M3, the jump to M5 could signal and new naming strategy from Canon, perhaps aligned with the EOS range... So M10, becomes M20, M30 etc... The M5 becomes M5 mkii, mkiii etc... Could we see the M20 being what would have been the M4, with a model slipping underneath, M100 ?

Sony E range is perhaps more closely aligned than that of the wildchild Fuji, so what next in terms of lenses... I anticipate a small selection of faster primes and a more select standard zoom, pushing the lens price to 150-200% of the current ranges, to match in with the growing aspirations of the M5, start pushing into Fuji price and performance territory, with maybe a standard f2.8 zoom and some middling f2.0 primes... Time is running out though, the smart phone mob are swarming at the bottom end of the market, entry level will be dead in a few years, middle to high is where Canon has to go with the EF-M range.


----------



## lw (Sep 8, 2016)

Apparently, these are the kits - http://nokishita-camera.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/eos-m5.html

EOS M5 body
EOS M5 15-45mm kit
EOS M5 18-150mm kit


----------



## LDS (Sep 8, 2016)

Tugela said:


> Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.



No. The sensor itself heats up - it's made of electronics components too trough which electricity flows. The more the "pixels", the more elements that will generate heath. Then there are other elements in a camera that can generate heat. Of course if you have to read and process data continuously, all them will generate heat which needs to be dissipated.


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 8, 2016)

LDS said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.
> ...


And in addition on-chip A/D conversion (if implemented as of new sensor tech) will increase the number of semiconductors on the chip leading to even more heat losses.
Of course it can be assumed that most of he heat losses come from the processor but while this one might cope a lot of heat already little increase of sensor temperature could cause negative effects on the readout quality, e.g. additional read noise.

So I am quite inclined to follow pokerz initial argumentation, that others have problems with 4K while Canon decided to not implement it in consumer products as long as it is not working properly, because here it is required to work without any trouble.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 8, 2016)

Haydn1971 said:


> ... I anticipate a small selection of faster primes and a more select standard zoom, pushing the lens price to 150-200% of the current ranges, to match in with the growing aspirations of the M5, start pushing into Fuji price and performance territory, ...



lol! Fuji lenses are just bigger, more retro ... aperture ring : and most notably *way more expensive*. 

No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D

All Canon needs to do, is launch 2 more dirt-cheap, optically excellent pancakes eg 35/2.0 and 15/4.0 and of course my much desired EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM short tele. More is not needed.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 8, 2016)

lw said:


> Apparently, these are the kits - http://nokiS___a-camera.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/eos-m5.html
> 
> EOS M5 body
> EOS M5 15-45mm kit
> EOS M5 18-150mm kit



Hey, CR guy, why is Nokish ita getting the Canon Watch treatment? I thought they were reputable...

- A


----------



## sigh (Sep 8, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> lw said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently, these are the kits - http://nokiS___a-camera.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/eos-m5.html
> ...



I suspect those four letters may have been caught by the profanity filter.


----------



## bsbeamer (Sep 8, 2016)

pokerz said:


> SAMSUNG!
> 
> NX1 takes a semi 8K sensor readout (!!!!!) (30.1 mp) and downscales it to 4K in-camera, in real time, Full APS-C sensor, zero cropm and compress to a demanding codec (h.264), all without giving a hint of failure even under Middle East frying weather. So hat's off to Samung for being the first company to do that. This capability (large sensor downscale to 4k and compress that huge data to HEVC or send out to HDMI at 4:2:2 is why cinema cameras are so large and require running fans and even water cooling, yet Samsung seems to have neated a weatger sealed tiny package that can do it! I think it's most likely due to their advanced technological know-how from phones and other devices?



The Samsung NX1 was such a promising camera. I was waiting for lens availability or a Metabones style adapter to work with that system, but nothing really came through. Total shame because what they were doing was pretty amazing at those price points.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Sep 8, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> More is not needed.



In your opinion of course ;-) 

I and many others want more...


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 8, 2016)

sigh said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > lw said:
> ...



S___. Good call. Even in a URL, wow.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 8, 2016)

Haydn1971 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > More is not needed.
> ...



well, usually I am accused of being delusional ... but chances that Canon ever will make fast primes (like f/1.4 or 1.2) and/or wheathersealed "L" grade lenses for EF-Mount = a crop sensor system are really zero. 

Good news is, that some of the dirt-cheap EF-M lenses have absolutely "L"-ish image quality. 22/2.0, 11-22 definitely.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 8, 2016)

Maximilian said:


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



In the past, Tugela has not shown himself to be particularly knowlegdable from a technical standpoint (despite attempts to _sound_ technically erudite). For example, his prior statement that any Canon camera with Digic 7 would have 4K video capture...but then the PowerShot G7 X Mark II came out with Digic 7 and no 4K.

As for the sensor itself generating heat during video capture, well, there's a reason my scientific cameras have Peltier cooling on the back side of the sensor, and it's not because of heat from the processor.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 8, 2016)

LDS said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Overheating has nothing to do with sensor size, the heat comes from the processor.
> ...



as the sensor fab geometry decreases, the sensor heat will also increase.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 8, 2016)

A-PeeR said:


> ashmadux said:
> 
> 
> > I tested the hell out of them(3), against my trusty M1+Phottix all metal grip.
> ...



Yes, your impression is correct. It does have EFCS, but when you fire the shutter at say half a second, so there is an obvious open and close, there is a distinct sound and small shock as the camera fires. This cannot be felt with the 5D in live view, but then that camera has so much mass it may be I just can't feel it. 

Strange, can anyone explain ?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 9, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


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



Seems we can add the EOS M5 to the list of cameras with Digic 7. Tugela, does the EOS M5 shoot 4K video?


----------



## pokerz (Sep 9, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Maximilian said:
> ...




Forever 1080 60P, thats CANON


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 9, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D



Years ago in college I had a roommate who had a habit of just talking out of his *ss. This statement completely falls into that category.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 9, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > No Fuji X-lens can optically touch the dirt-cheap EF-M 22/2.0, the EF-M Macro 28 or the very best crop UWA-zoom currently on the market: EF-M 11-22. And this comes from me, I am not exactly known as a Canon Fanboy. ;D
> ...



Not really. the 11-22 and 22 2.0 can be purchased new for under $500 combined. they are both excellent optically , and small.

the corresponding Fuji lenses are optically on par or slightly better, and far larger, heavier and far far more expensive.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 9, 2016)

the corresponding Fuji lenses are only mechanically better. and of course the 10-24 is constant f/4 and 1mm wider, which is a clear advantage over the EF-M 11-22. IQ wise, those little canon EF-M lenses are real beasts. 

Canon could however take a cue from the neato and cheapo Fuji 35/2.0 - optically and pricewise it would be EF-M-worthy! of course i'd prefer it even lighter, plastic not metal and without the useless aperture ring.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 9, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> the cortrsponding fuji lenses are only mechanically better. and of course the 10-24 is constant f/4 and 1mm wider, which is a clear advantage over the EF-M 11-22. but iq wise, those little canon EF-M lenses are real beasts.
> 
> canon could however take a cue from the neato and cheapo fuji 35/2.0 - optically and pricewise it would be EF-M-worthy! of course i'd prefer it even lighter, plastic not metal and without the useless aperture ring.



a 15/3.5 and a 35/1.8 would certainly be nice additions.

same with giving Sigma a little payola to release EF-M DN Art lenses


----------



## Luds34 (Sep 10, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Gentlemen,

I was referring to the "no Fuji X-lens can optically touch..." statement. That is just plain false. A majority of the Fuji XF lenses are optically outstanding! They are well known for excellent micro contrast. 

While the Fuji system is really starting to come into it's own as a complete, well rounded system, that wasn't always the case. Focus was slooooow on static objects, forget about motion. There were other quirks with most bodies. However, the one thing they had going from day one, has been the IQ in the images. And a large part of that has been their optically top-notch glass.

Cheers!


----------



## Haydn1971 (Sep 10, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> a 15/3.5 and a 35/1.8 would certainly be nice additions.



Both as small pancake type lenses, sounds good to me, then something longer, fast and compact.

I'd say the previously suggested 30mm would be way too close to the 28mm macro...

So 15 - 22 - 28 - 35 - 50-56mm


----------



## mangobutter (Sep 12, 2016)

I hope the body is priced reasonably. Still though i may just keep my M3. dont know what this offers really thats much different. I dont care about a view finder.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 13, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> the corresponding Fuji lenses are only mechanically better. and of course the 10-24 is constant f/4 and 1mm wider, which is a clear advantage over the EF-M 11-22. IQ wise, those little canon EF-M lenses are real beasts.
> 
> Canon could however take a cue from the neato and cheapo Fuji 35/2.0 - optically and pricewise it would be EF-M-worthy! of course i'd prefer it even lighter, plastic not metal and without the useless aperture ring.


Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 14, 2016)

pokerz said:


> Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
> How you make a stepless/ smooth aperture change on camera body while shooting movie?



because any reasonable digital camera has one or more very decent physical controls to vary aperture size. those control elements are called back wherl and front wheel and/or touch LCD plus proper firmware. control can be clicked in full, half or 1/3 stops or smooth action ... as user prefers and sets it.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 14, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> pokerz said:
> 
> 
> > Can you tell the reason why aperture ring is useless?
> ...


Which Canon DSLR/ Mirrorless has said function? ;D


----------



## SeppOz (Sep 14, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Luds34 said:
> ...



+1 and I do have Fuji lenses, as well as the canon 11-22 and 22 f2 to compare.

If the size of the M5 is right it will be higher than the Fuji X-T10. Shame, was hoping for a form factor similar to the A6300.

On another note, has there been any more news on the canon tilt and shift adapter that was patented some time ago? That would make for a really interesting enthusiasts addition.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 14, 2016)

pokerz said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > pokerz said:
> ...



every single EOS M ever made from M 1st gen to M2, M10 and M3. all have at least 1 wheel and a touch LCD to control aperture in Av and M. video? dont care, go buy a video camera.


----------

