# The Next EOS M [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 3, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14286"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14286">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>The New EOS M

</strong>We’re told that an EOS M announcement is coming soon. This source believes two cameras will be announced simultaneously, although that is not yet confirmed. As mentioned previously, the first camera will be a minor upgrade from the current EOS M and priced much lower than the original EOS M. It will also be available in more colors than the previous model.</p>
<p>A second higher end camera will be have more accessories available for it, such as an EVF. The system will also get a new flash.</p>
<p>A longer telephoto zoom will also be announced alongside at least one of these cameras.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Woody (Sep 3, 2013)

The original EOS M is selling very well in Japan now, thanks to aggressive pricing as well as the much needed firmware AF update. I expect the replacement EOS M to feature the same dual pixel technology in the EOS 70D, this will make the EOS M really sell like hot cakes, at least in the Asia Pacific area.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Sep 3, 2013)

I hope it has full frame and an optical viewfinder and takes EF lenses natively.


I don't. I don't and I don't.

But I just wanted to be the first to say it.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 3, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> I hope it has full frame and an optical viewfinder and takes EF lenses natively.
> 
> 
> I don't. I don't and I don't.
> ...



Feel better now? Fine. Now I'll be the first to say:_ Pancakes, pancakes, pancakes!_

At the very least, give us a forty in an _M_ mount please. Is that asking too much?


----------



## alexturton (Sep 3, 2013)

brad-man said:


> paul13walnut5 said:
> 
> 
> > I hope it has full frame and an optical viewfinder and takes EF lenses natively.
> ...



+1 pancakes pancakes pancakes.

The only thing stopping me from buying a APSC CSC camera right now is the lacks of one with good AF and a decent range of pancakes.

That said, if the new M has the AF speed of some of the sony NEX range. I'd buy one.


----------



## jebrady03 (Sep 3, 2013)

alexturton said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > paul13walnut5 said:
> ...



+2!

LOVE the size and weight of the M plus 22. I'd love to get a few more native pancakes. For now, I'm really enjoying using it plus the 40 STM via adapter. I could see me buying one or two more pancakes (depending on the FL) as well as an "occasional use" telephoto zoom and probably the 11-22 and just ditching my 60D and lenses and buying a 6D or 6D2 depending on the timing. One for really important pics, the other for casual use.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Sep 3, 2013)

Yup, more pancakes would be nice. 

I don't see the point of a CSC without them. Would be good to see canon follow Pentax's lead.

What focal length pancakes? Fast UWA prime? Short Tele?

I've actually rediscovered 35mm equivalent as a nice perspective, in my early days I was eager for drama and perspective, so pooh pooh'd boring established FL's like 35. But it's nice. Especially with the fast aperture.
I like my 22 EF-m a lot.

And I WAS kidding about the other stuff.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 3, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> Yup, more pancakes would be nice.
> 
> I don't see the point of a CSC without them. Would be good to see canon follow Pentax's lead.
> 
> ...



35mm is a great focal length, and the reason why I like the M/22mm combination for a compact walkaround. I'm actually more partial to the 35mm focal length than the standard 50mm.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 3, 2013)

If nothing else, the M I got through the firesale has got me interested in the platform. I certainly wouldn't mind the zoom if it were reasonably compact, but I would really like to see a few more pancakes.

I will be interested to see how they differentiate the two models...and when they will start selling the 11-22mm in the US


----------



## serpicolugnut (Sep 3, 2013)

As an owner/lover of the first M, I don't think a lack of color options is what hurt the line in the US. The slow autofocus that was largely addressed in the 2.x update was the main culprit. The other was the initial price. I know that once the price hit $300-$350 for the body with the 22mm lens, they started flying off the shelf here.

So, take a new version, add the dual pixel AF from the 70D, and I think you have a winner. Obviously adding a longer telephoto lens would be welcome, but honestly, with the EF mount adapter, I don't see the lack of a longer EF-M telephoto as too much of a drawback. 

The bigger issue is that Canon USA apparently has no confidence in the line, which is the only logical explanation as to why they aren't selling the EF-M 11-22 lens here in the states. Which is a shame, because I picked one up a couple of weeks ago, and that lens, paired with the M body, makes a great travel/landscape/architecture combination that is both powerful and light.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Sep 3, 2013)

serpicolugnut said:


> Obviously adding a longer telephoto lens would be welcome, but honestly, with the EF mount adapter, I don't see the lack of a longer EF-M telephoto as too much of a drawback.



+1 Absolutely, something like a 55-250 is never going to be compact anyway, the existing EF-s model can be had pretty cheaply (for a lens capable of such decent images) and the new STM version looks even better, hopefully the price is right.

If you are wanting a telephoto lens then your bag is going to be bigger, why not just get the existing option that will mount on a wider range of bodies and the adaptor, no point duplicating lenses, in my opinion at least. An EF-m is restrictive, an EF-s less so. EF would be ideal? (but then we already have the 70-300 IS non L)


----------



## padmasana (Sep 3, 2013)

Looking forward to the next generation of this camera.
I've become quite a fan of the EOS M.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Sep 3, 2013)

Be nice if Canon would take the Fuji route and provide really good primes. On the other hand, Fuji doesn't have to
protect Rebel market share and wedge in a product whose only advantage is size.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 3, 2013)

I'd be interested in an M with a built-in EVF. A camera with an awkward hot-shoe EVF just doesn't cut-it with someone who uses a lot of fill flash.


----------



## RGF (Sep 3, 2013)

Like to see really good AF -plus a crop greater than 1.6 (a la Nikon) would be nice. My great whites will become even mightier!


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (Sep 3, 2013)

The next M needs:
- GPS
- WiFi
- flip/swivel rear screen
- built in flash


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Sep 3, 2013)

I might be the only one who wants a 15mm pancake ^_^ Or why stop there... an 11mm or even 10mm pancake would be surreal.


----------



## noncho (Sep 3, 2013)

You are not the only one, I want 12mm pancake but after 11-22 IS I don't think we will see such wide pancakes soon.

P.S. 11, 44 and 88mm primes(pancakes) would be a great company for 22/2


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2013)

serpicolugnut said:


> The bigger issue is that Canon USA apparently has no confidence in the line, which is the only logical explanation as to why they aren't selling the EF-M 11-22 lens here in the states.



It could also be that they plan to make a bigger splash with the new M by announcing 1-2 lenses along with it in the USA.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 3, 2013)

c.d.embrey said:


> I'd be interested in an M with a built-in EVF. A camera with an awkward hot-shoe EVF just doesn't cut-it with someone who uses a lot of fill flash.



+1


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2013)

c.d.embrey said:


> I'd be interested in an M with a built-in EVF. A camera with an awkward hot-shoe EVF just doesn't cut-it with someone who uses a lot of fill flash.



To me, that sounds like bigger. In the case of the M, I don't think bigger is better.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 3, 2013)

Obviously, the new "longer" lens to be released with the EOS-M models is the 800F5.6


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > I'd be interested in an M with a built-in EVF. A camera with an awkward hot-shoe EVF just doesn't cut-it with someone who uses a lot of fill flash.
> ...



There's no reason why there can't be a body with a built-in EVF and one without. However, I'm with c.d.embrey on this one. A shrunken DSLR form factor would be good, something like the rumored Olympus E-M1, with tiny lenses to match, for when I don't want to carry around a 22-lb photo backpack.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 3, 2013)

dickgrafixstop said:


> Be nice if Canon would take the Fuji route and provide really good primes. On the other hand, Fuji doesn't have to
> protect Rebel market share and wedge in a product whose only advantage is size.



Why would Canon be concerned with people buying EOS-M instead of a Rebel? They cover the same price range, and as long as I'm spending my money on something from Canon I'm sure they don't really care what it is.

Honestly I wouldn't mind if the Rebels and EF-S mount went away forever. I want a 7D2/70D to run my telephoto, but I don't really need or want any EF-S lenses, and everything else would work just as well without the SLR (now that they have on-sensor AF).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2013)

Bob Howland said:


> There's no reason why there can't be a body with a built-in EVF and one without.



If Canon (or Canon USA, at least) is having trouble pushing one model, how will they feel about two? The other problem I see with that is that I'm afraid the two models will have different sensors - a cheap one (T5i/SL1 sensor, no EVF) and a more expensive one (70D sensor, EVF, and bigger).


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 3, 2013)

If EOS-M catches on they should just try to move the Rebel line to full frame, ending the need for EF-S forever. Just give the 6D the T3 treatment, remove as many high end features as possible and use a low resolution sensor. If they could reach the sub $1,000 price point I'm sure it would be a hit (and a great camera, I love my T3).



neuroanatomist said:


> Bob Howland said:
> 
> 
> > There's no reason why there can't be a body with a built-in EVF and one without.
> ...



If they want to succeed all future EOS-M must have dual pixel AF, anything without it will just get laughed at.
I really hope no-one at Canon is that dumb.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 3, 2013)

9VIII said:


> I really hope no-one at Canon is that dumb.



You evidently have a higher opinion of them than I do….


----------



## jebrady03 (Sep 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> If Canon (or Canon USA, at least) is having trouble pushing one model, how will they feel about two?



Saying this is taking the situation out of context. You're acting like the 2 models will be comparable to the existing M (one may be and I agree with the rest of your post that a lower spec'd M may retain the 18mp sensor) and that's not even close to the case at hand.

The current M failed initially for 3 main reasons (as you well know); price, AF, lens selection compared to competition. AF was remedied somewhat (to a very usable degree in my opinion and experience) and the price was slashed big time. Now the M is selling VERY well - even with the same lens selection and people are VERY happy with what they have in their hands.

A high-spec'd M (DPAF sensor) would be a totally different animal and if Canon announces the M with 2-3 lenses (11-22, 50-ish prime, and telephoto zoom) then it's not even fair to compare the situations. There will be WAY too many variables that are different and if people can't grasp that then... well... Sounds like a mental deficiency to me.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Sep 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Bob Howland said:
> 
> 
> > There's no reason why there can't be a body with a built-in EVF and one without.
> ...



I think your guess is right...and I do wonder about the wisdom of such a choice.

The #1 attribute of the M is its sensor size...huge relative to its body.

The #2 attribute of the M is the body's small size...which makes the 22mm pancake a winner.

The #3 attribute of the M is its 11-22mm lens, which brings above-average, image-stabilized, Canon-branded wide-angle shots to hobbyists at a very reasonable price

But the 18-55mm lens is actually pretty good, too, and it is better for video than the 22mm because of IS. I own a second-generation Rebel, and it and its kit 18-55mm lens is jumbo-sized compared with the M with its 18-55mm attached.

So, I would be less inclined to buy an M that is (substantially) physically larger...I would just rather use one of my DSLRs instead.

The EVF, in my view, might sell more bodies to the holdouts out there, but my gosh I have certainly gotten used to shooting M-style...so much so that I occasionally find myself reaching for my DSLR's LCD screen! So an EVF inclusion that makes the M's body larger? Or even just a little bit larger? I vote no.

...on the other hand, a movable, tiltable LCD screen for the M? If that could be done (with minimal enlargement of the body)...I might buy into that.

But this two-different-model solution to fix what ails M sales? I don't know. It sure might confuse the public.

Here is what Canon needs to find out...how much will their base pay for 70D-quality focusing on an M body? If you think about it...it is a really fascinating question.

Would Canon move product by selling such an M...for the same price as the 70D? I don't think so.

If the 70D is $1,000.00, how much will its M analog go for? What would folks be willing to pay?

I am not sure.

Let's go further. Suppose they could build an M with the capabilities of the 7DII. What would people pay?

Not sure again...and let's face it, those who would buy an M at this price are NOT going double up and buy the 7DII, too, are they?

But the mirrorless thing is not going to go away.

Echoing a previous post of mine (and made on this thread by another poster), I can honestly envision APS-C, for Canon, going entirely mirrorless.

And I own the 17-55 2.8 IS Canon lens...so I've invested in APS-C as well. But there's something about the M, and mirrorless shooting, that I believe is going to appeal to young photographers, and novice photographers. It has surely caught my fancy...slow focus and all.

Sure it is too soon (even for APS-C) to say...the mirror is dead, long live the mirror. But that day is coming. Maybe not for full frame...but sooner for APS-C, I think.


----------



## jhanken (Sep 3, 2013)

> > I'd be interested in an M with a built-in EVF. A camera with an awkward hot-shoe EVF just doesn't cut-it with someone who uses a lot of fill flash.
> 
> 
> 
> To me, that sounds like bigger. In the case of the M, I don't think bigger is better.



Agreed. I think we need to remember that we just got the SL, which sounds a lot like what c.d.embrey is looking for.


----------



## sylvestrerato (Sep 3, 2013)

I'd be interested in a full frame M...


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > I'd be interested in an M with a built-in EVF. A camera with an awkward hot-shoe EVF just doesn't cut-it with someone who uses a lot of fill flash.
> ...



Mirrorless APS-C with EVF could be built only slightly larger/heavier than current EOS-M. 

I am not in the least interested in any low-end Canon "M". If Canon wants me to ever buy an "EOS-M", they need to build it 
* very compact = not much bigger than current EOS-M
* very capable = IQ, AF, EVF, handling, performance, battery life 500+, Wifi + GPS + Speedlite RT radio controller on-board, fully articulated LCD, fully weather-sealed] 
* very reasonably priced = about 200 Euro less than an equally capable SLR [because it is so a hell of a lot cheaper to manufacture; less parts, less mechanical crap, less calibration issues] 

Basically, I would buy a full 7D equivalent with 70D sensor+live-view-AF and touchscreen for max. € 1,200


----------



## sneakerpimp (Sep 3, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Obviously, the new "longer" lens to be released with the EOS-M models is the 800F5.6



...which will be a pancake


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Bob Howland said:
> 
> 
> > There's no reason why there can't be a body with a built-in EVF and one without.
> ...



I don't think the M system can survive with only one camera model. The implication would be that Canon isn't really serious about this system and Canon needs to start treating it like a system, even if a small one. As for using separate sensors for the two models, I agree with those who believe that the 70D sensor (or a close relative) is the minimum that could reasonably be put into any new M body. If not, why not just keep selling the current M body at the current price (or perhaps $100 higher)? That being said, one thing that has always puzzled me is why Canon went to the expense of revising the firmware in a model that was going to be replaced in a few months.


----------



## jebrady03 (Sep 3, 2013)

Bob Howland said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Howland said:
> ...



Just a guess... I don't think the price drop would have been enough to get people to buy into the system, the AF needed to be sped up.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 3, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> Bob Howland said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



+1. It was a smart move, actually, because there is certainly a buzz over the M that was non-existent three months ago. It may prove to be the springboard Canon needed to making the line a success with future models. Price sells - particularly in the North American market


----------



## BL (Sep 3, 2013)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> The next M needs:
> - GPS
> - WiFi
> - flip/swivel rear screen
> - built in flash



for the critics, i'd like to add:

- Optical/Electronic VF
- FF sensor
- Amazing AF
- fast(ish) fps
- Dual card slots
- 1000+ shots battery life
- Weathersealed
- Headphone jack
- More physical buttons and dials
- Better ergo/balance with larger grip

Did I miss anything? 

oh wait. i think that's called a DSLR! ;D ;D ;D

I jest!!! i LOVE my much maligned mkI. i don't care what gets added to the next iteration. Pls just keep it small...


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 3, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> jebrady03 said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Howland said:
> ...



Or maybe the cheaper upcoming body will be the same as the old body, but with manufacturing costs reduced, for example with a plastic body instead of a metal body.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 3, 2013)

For some reason the current EOS-M video is crappy above ISO800.

An EOS-M II would have to have video comparable to the 70D to interest me, and the dual pixel AF.

So I hope they use the 70D sensor and add a swivel screen. That would make it a sweet little video cam, and great backup for the 5DIII.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> To me, that sounds like bigger. In the case of the M, I don't think bigger is better.



A Sony NEX-6 isn't much larger and it has a man sized hand grip http://camerasize.com/compare/#375,351


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 3, 2013)

jhanken said:


> I think we need to remember that we just got the SL, which sounds a lot like what c.d.embrey is looking for.



No, I'm NOT looking for the SL (I wouldn't take one as a gift). When the SL was a rumor I was hoping for a digital EOS IX http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/data/1996-2000/1996_eos-ix-e.html?lang=us&categ=crn&page=1996-2000&p=1 An APS-C film camera that used EF lenses.

For a mirrorless the Sony NEX-6 comes closet to what I want.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Sep 3, 2013)

If they are going to stay APS-C, I would like to see a GREAT 35mm pancake lens for it. Or have SEVERAL primes available for it. Sorry, but the Canon lenses for it just aren't good enough. They need to get a deal with Zeiss to offer some of those tasty lenses available for Fuji and Sony. Now THAT would be nice!

But it needs MUCH better lens support. Putting on an adapter (a $160 option) to use your EF/EF-S glass is just not a good option. At this point. I'd rather have the Canon SL1.

For what you get and the price, the Canon M is pretty darn nice. If they had an excellent 35mm with a maximum aperture starting at f2.8, I would consider it. But they need much better native-lens support and a few more standard options like WiFi. Really, throw in WiFi and a tilt-able screen and you're getting a Sony NEX 6 for half the price.


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 3, 2013)

c.d.embrey said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > To me, that sounds like bigger. In the case of the M, I don't think bigger is better.
> ...



Now that is a useful website! Thanks!


----------



## pwp (Sep 4, 2013)

RGomezPhotos said:


> At this point. I'd rather have the Canon SL1...


After checking out a bazillion choices, that's precisely what I have done. The SL-1 is brilliant. I got mine as a travel camera, reluctant to travel again with the weight & bulk of the 5D3 or 1D4. An EF-S 22mm pancake would be the killer extra for this tiny body.

FWIW, the final front-runners were the SL-1, the quite brilliant Olympus OM-D system then the M. 

-PW


----------



## tcmatthews (Sep 4, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > If Canon (or Canon USA, at least) is having trouble pushing one model, how will they feel about two?
> ...



I have do disagree on one of your three main reasons. I do not think that the lens on initial release were a contributing factor. The biggest issue in the USA besides Auto focus was the lack of store presence. Unless it is in the stores nobody will buy one. I just went to the Store played with a Rebel t4i in liveview and decided I hated their touch implementation. It was the best I could do because nobody has a M around here.

I think that Canon should produce two M bodies. One much the same as the current body and one with a built in EVF. Personally if the current M was not ridiculously priced below the Nex 20mm Lens I would have never bought one. A Nex 6 suits my style better than the current EOS M. I dislike buying even a point and shoot with out a EVF. 

My existing M Lens (22mm and 18-55mm) are better than the corresponding Nex Lens. The M has no problem focusing a f1.8 lens. (I always have to manual adjust focus of my Nex 50mm f1.8.) The EOS M has better auto white balance. M has much better build quality than the plastic Nex.

If the next EOS M has a built in EFV, articulating screen, mode selection switch, and a few more manual buttons it would be a very attractive alternative to the Nex6. That said unless something radically changes my next mirrorless will still be a Nex. I will not be buying another M until I need to replace my current one as a point and shoot.

*I think Canon made a mistake by having the build quality of the EOS M two high for its performance. The next M will likely be a plastic M. 
*


----------



## tcmatthews (Sep 4, 2013)

sylvestrerato said:


> I'd be interested in a full frame M...



I would buy one tomorrow if it has EVF, good manual controls, and focus peeking all rapped up nicely in a range finder style body. Sadly Sony will beat them to it.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 4, 2013)

What they actually need is the new 70D AF system. How can they expect the M line to be taken seriously and then not give it the new 70D liveview AF? Isn't the reason the system was a failure because were mad about the AF?
(I've honestly barely looked into M at all so I may be saying things ridiculous and or off-base though)


----------



## Woody (Sep 4, 2013)

tcmatthews said:


> I would buy one tomorrow if it has EVF, good manual controls, and focus peeking all rapped up nicely in a range finder style body. Sadly Sony will beat them to it.



Sony may have some decent mirrorless offerings, but their lens selection is pathetic.
I will pick m43 any day over Sony.

However, ultimately, DSLRs are still my preferred choice. I used the OM-D for a year and it gave me some great images but I also came to realize I hated EVFs. Also, the grips on these mirrorless cameras are far too small... regardless of how much padding they put on. So, I sold all my m43 stuff and happily ran back into the comforting embrace of my Canon DSLRs.


----------



## bholliman (Sep 4, 2013)

Hopefully the will add the dual pixel auto focus from the 70D. 

Other than that, I'd love to see more lenses. Fast primes would be awesome.


----------



## gmrza (Sep 4, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> What they actually need is the new 70D AF system. How can they expect the M line to be taken seriously and then not give it the new 70D liveview AF? Isn't the reason the system was a failure because were mad about the AF?
> (I've honestly barely looked into M at all so I may be saying things ridiculous and or off-base though)



I would like to see them taking some of the features from the 70D (AF system, like you mentioned) as well as some from the G16 (especially focus peaking). Couple those, and you start to have an interesting camera.

If the new EOS M has these, an (optional) EVF and remote shutter release socket, I will start looking at it more closely.

I would still look at one of the current EOS Ms, if going cheap, as a candidate for IR conversion.


----------



## Woody (Sep 4, 2013)

gmrza said:


> I would still look at one of the current EOS Ms, if going cheap, as a candidate for IR conversion.



Hmmmm.... great idea. Think I will do that too.


----------



## mountain_drew (Sep 4, 2013)

gmrza said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > What they actually need is the new 70D AF system. How can they expect the M line to be taken seriously and then not give it the new 70D liveview AF? Isn't the reason the system was a failure because were mad about the AF?
> ...


For focus peaking, there's magic lantern. It's free, risk free and easy to install. One of the benefits of having a Canon.


----------



## tcmatthews (Sep 4, 2013)

Woody said:


> tcmatthews said:
> 
> 
> > I would buy one tomorrow if it has EVF, good manual controls, and focus peeking all rapped up nicely in a range finder style body. Sadly Sony will beat them to it.
> ...



Who said anything about using Sony Lens. I now have almost a full set of legacy FD/M42 primes and for those closer to full frame is better. The only native lens I use regularly is the 10-18mm.


----------



## linus (Sep 4, 2013)

Canon sensor, image processing, near-full support for FD lenses with a non-optical-element adapter (for the first time in the EOS era), plus some of the best not-pro optics for an aps-c camera to date (as well as a nice price drop): it was a no-brainer for me.

But the premium model should have a built-in EVF and the current model (as well as its successor) should (have been if it wasn't +) be hard-wired for a hot shoe mount EVF (lacking only firmware implementation) and in short order the hot shoe mount evf should be available for all new Canon dslrs too.


----------



## tcmatthews (Sep 4, 2013)

mountain_drew said:


> gmrza said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



I have not tried out Magic Lantern on my M but tried out focus peeking 60d. I found Sony's implementation on the Nex 6 easier to use. But I like Magic Lanterns artificial slit prism old fashioned phase detection view. I need to play with it more. It will still be useless in sunlight without a EVF of some type.


----------



## eric_ykchan (Sep 4, 2013)

What is the chance for Canon to release something that is on par with other mirrorless camera, if Canon can finally release it on time? But Sony is going to release a FF mirrorless.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Sep 4, 2013)

pwp said:


> RGomezPhotos said:
> 
> 
> > At this point. I'd rather have the Canon SL1...
> ...



Yes. The SL1 is NICE. I bought a 50D instead of a Rebel because the small body didn't feel good in my hands. But as small as the SL1 is, they did a great job on ergonomics. I felt really comfortable with it. But even the SL1 isn't small enough for me to really use it much. The Sony NEX 6 looks like a much smaller format but with great image quality. With Zeiss providing great lenses for it, it should be a viable format for some time to come.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Sep 4, 2013)

Lenses, lenses, lenses. More lenses to match the form factor and weight without having to use an adapter. Then maybe more people will buy into it as a "system".


----------



## Woody (Sep 4, 2013)

tcmatthews said:


> Who said anything about using Sony Lens. I now have almost a full set of legacy FD/M42 primes and for those closer to full frame is better. The only native lens I use regularly is the 10-18mm.



No offense, but you belong to a very very very small group of users who are still stuck in the FD/M42 era. It probably makes more sense for companies to focus on the needs of the remaining 99%.


----------



## twoeye (Sep 4, 2013)

Wishlist for the next EOS M
- Built-in EVF
- dual pixel AF like 70D
- improved dynamic range....

Lens wishlist:
- 50mm f2.5 macro IS


----------



## bobw (Sep 4, 2013)

Chosenbydestiny said:


> Lenses, lenses, lenses. More lenses to match the form factor and weight without having to use an adapter. Then maybe more people will buy into it as a "system".



I think the current discount prices should help with that. Selling lots of cameras creates a market for lenses.

While selling the camera cheap may not make Canon much money now, I think it was necessary to get the line going.
Once there is a sufficient user-base, then they can make some money selling lenses/accessories/upgrade cameras.
It will also start to attract other companies to produce products.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 4, 2013)

Retro Design FF with more pancakes. WOW me this time Mr. Canon :


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 4, 2013)

eric_ykchan said:


> But Sony is going to release a FF mirrorless.



Full Frame and mirrorless don't go together. An 85mm lens on an APS-C and a 135mm lens on FF have the same Field Of View. One of the BIG selling points of mirrorless is small & light. Hanging a BIGGER FF lens on a smaller mirrorless body kills that advantage.

1. EF 85mm f/1.8 USM - Max. Diameter x Length, Weight	3.0" x 2.8", 15.0 oz. / 75.0 x 71.5mm, 425g

2. EF 135mm f/2L USM - Max. Diameter x Length, Weight	3.2" x 4.4", 1.7 lbs. / 82.5 x 112.0mm, 750g

BTW not everyone wants/needs paper-thin DOF. For my advertising work I shoot a 5D3 at f/8 to f/16.

BTW2 This is where advertising is headed ... shallow DOF need not apply http://nitrogr.am/blog/armani-instagram-ads/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 4, 2013)

c.d.embrey said:


> eric_ykchan said:
> 
> 
> > But Sony is going to release a FF mirrorless.
> ...



Fine, but although 85mm on APS-C gives the same FoV as 135mm on FF, the 85/1.8 on APS-C gives the DoF of ~f/2.8 for that same FoV. If you want the equivalent of 135mm f/2 on your APS-C, you need:

3. EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM - Max. Diameter x Length, Weight 3.6" x 3.3", 2.3 lbs. / 91.5 x 84.0mm, 1025g

...and the 135L on FF will give you better IQ than the 85L II on APS-C.


----------



## sylvestrerato (Sep 4, 2013)

I see no reason why FF would not go with mirrorless...


----------



## bainsybike (Sep 4, 2013)

sylvestrerato said:


> I see no reason why FF would not go with mirrorless...



Neither do I - there were (are?) plenty of examples in the days of film. Or am I missing something?


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Sep 4, 2013)

bainsybike said:


> sylvestrerato said:
> 
> 
> > I see no reason why FF would not go with mirrorless...
> ...



Yep. Light could hit film at different angles and be recorded correctly. The light has to be much more straight on for sensors, or you'll get really bad chroma and fall off.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 4, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> c.d.embrey said:
> 
> 
> > BTW not everyone wants/needs paper-thin DOF. For my advertising work I shoot a 5D3 at f/8 to f/16.
> ...



*What's so hard to understand? I shoot my advertising work at f/8 to F/16* with a 5D3. Clients like their customers to get a clear view of their product, not some *arty blur.*

IQ, you've got to be kidding, I've shot ads with a 40D using an F/1.8 85mm lens set at f/16. Were not talking about HUGH prints, just full page magazine work (print = about 150 DPI). If I was interested in High IQ I'd shoot chromes with my 4x5 or rent an 80Mp MFD (with a 240 mm LS f/4.5 IF leaf shutter lens.).

*Different strokes for different folks!*


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 4, 2013)

bainsybike said:


> sylvestrerato said:
> 
> 
> > I see no reason why FF would not go with mirrorless...
> ...



Film cameras were much lighter than today's Full Frame digital cameras. A Canon T70 weighed about 20 Oz. vs 33+ Oz for a Canon 5D3.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 4, 2013)

c.d.embrey said:


> eric_ykchan said:
> 
> 
> > But Sony is going to release a FF mirrorless.
> ...



I wholeheartedly have to disagree here: "Full Frame" [36x24mm] and mirrorless go together VERY NICELY. The body is small and light (think Sony RX-1R), so are pancake lenses from wide-angle right up to portrait lenses [~80mm .. see Pentax for pancakes]. This gives us a really compact and light package when we don't need to carry more. Or don't want to.  

Tele lenses are big anyways, and most of us don't carry them along all the time. When we need them, we just take our existing EF-lenses and an adapter and are set to go. And if one does not like shallow DOF, no problem ... just close the aperture to an f/stop of your liking. 

The only thing missing up to now is a Canon mirrorless with FF-sensor and FF-capable, short flangeback lens mount, plus a few good fixed focal pancakes [e.g. 16/24/35/50/80] and a fully functional EF-adapter [as for EF-M].


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 4, 2013)

c.d.embrey said:


> *What's so hard to understand? I shoot my advertising work at f/8 to F/16* with a 5D3. Clients like their customers to get a clear view of their product, not some *arty blur.*


What I found hard to understand was your opening blanket statement:



c.d.embrey said:


> Full Frame and mirrorless don't go together.


If you'd said, "_I_ have no use for a FF mirrorless camera because _I_ only shoot from f/8 to f/16," that's one thing. But as far as I'm concerned, FF and mirrorless go together like peanut butter and chocolate. Now, maybe you're allergic to peanuts or can't stand the taste of chocolate, but that's not true for everyone.

Some folks like arty blur, and find documentary images shot at f/8-f/16 quite boring. 

Thin DoF and 'arty blur' aren't used in advertisements? :


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Sep 5, 2013)

bobw said:


> Chosenbydestiny said:
> 
> 
> > Lenses, lenses, lenses. More lenses to match the form factor and weight without having to use an adapter. Then maybe more people will buy into it as a "system".
> ...



Also true, but if they're going to market this to photographers (or cinematographers) who want a secondary or backup body I'd like to see more utility out of it. Some people are waiting for the EOS M to get it's feet wet as a system rather than have it updated over and over with still only a few native lenses out. The fact the 11-22mm EF-M isn't even being sold in the USA is actually discouraging me from buying. But that's just how I feel about it.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Sep 5, 2013)

No matter your actual shooting aperture the potential for depth of field control is what matters, the larger the sensor the greater the range, so less depth of field at wide apertures and less aperture limited diffraction at small apertures.
The usable aperture range of a lens increases with sensor size. 

It's also worth noting that for a lot of product photography cameras with tilt or swing lenses / bellows / backs are used. i.e. Medium or large format backs. to control not just the depth of field, but also the plane of focus.

Another example of so called 'Full Frame' users thinking they are the bees knees, when in the wider world, product photographers wouldn't generally pith on a so called 'full frame' or 'APS-C' format camera if it was on fire.

It's like fighting over whether a dagger or a sword is a better weapon to tackle somebody with a machine gun.
I do like a pointless simile. I'll try and get a car one in next.


----------



## bobw (Sep 5, 2013)

Chosenbydestiny said:


> Also true, but if they're going to market this to photographers (or cinematographers) who want a secondary or backup body I'd like to see more utility out of it.



The big question is who exactly are they marketing it to? It would seem to me that the biggest selling point is size and weight. I'm not sure that's a top priority to most professional photographers. There are some who need to be mobile who might like it.

It's certainly attractive to serious amateur photographers.


----------



## vp7 (Sep 5, 2013)

I just saw the EOS-M with the 18-55 and flash for $299.99 at the local Costco. Now I am even more tempted. I am most likely going to be moving to some sort of mirrorless really soon and have been waiting for Canon to expand their line. I would love the APS-C quality image that I got with the 7D and 60D in the small package for travel.

At the moment I am looking at the Olympus OM-D, I guess I will wait for a few more announcements before I commit, this month should be pretty busy with all the announcements. Hopefully Canon's will be one of them.

I am pretty happy with the 6D but it's getting to be too heavy to drag around while traveling and hiking.

Any suggestions?


----------



## bobw (Sep 5, 2013)

vp7 said:


> I just saw the EOS-M with the 18-55 and flash for $299.99 at the local Costco. Now I am even more tempted. I am most likely going to be moving to some sort of mirrorless really soon and have been waiting for Canon to expand their line. I would love the APS-C quality image that I got with the 7D and 60D in the small package for travel.



$300 is about what it would cost to buy just the lens and flash. The camera is nearly free. Even if you decide to upgrade the camera when the next version is available you haven't lost anything.


----------



## Frankling (Sep 6, 2013)

Can't wait to get one with the new Dual Pixel Cmos!
I don't like the look of Sony NEX series.


----------



## Woody (Sep 6, 2013)

c.d.embrey said:


> Full Frame and mirrorless don't go together. An 85mm lens on an APS-C and a 135mm lens on FF have the same Field Of View. One of the BIG selling points of mirrorless is small & light. Hanging a BIGGER FF lens on a smaller mirrorless body kills that advantage.



I should point out that a 135 f/2 FF lens designed from scratch for an EVIL FF camera can be relatively small and lightweight due to the shortened flange distance.

Personally, I will never purchase a mirrorless camera, having used one for a year. The conclusion I arrived at after one year of trial is this: I HATE EVF. ;D


----------



## jebrady03 (Sep 6, 2013)

bobw said:


> vp7 said:
> 
> 
> > I just saw the EOS-M with the 18-55 and flash for $299.99 at the local Costco. Now I am even more tempted. I am most likely going to be moving to some sort of mirrorless really soon and have been waiting for Canon to expand their line. I would love the APS-C quality image that I got with the 7D and 60D in the small package for travel.
> ...



Checked my local Costco, no such deal unfortunately  Not on their website either.


----------



## bholliman (Sep 6, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> bobw said:
> 
> 
> > vp7 said:
> ...



None available here either (Indiana). I would buy (another) M one at this price just to get the 18-55 lens. I would then sell the body and speedlite.


----------



## jhanken (Sep 13, 2013)

Any more CR dirt on this? 

I am eagerly waiting for some kind of signal as to whether the EOS-M is an evolutionary dead end (at least in the US), or whether it will continue and be worthy of investment.


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 13, 2013)

jhanken said:


> Any more CR dirt on this?
> 
> I am eagerly waiting for some kind of signal as to whether the EOS-M is an evolutionary dead end (at least in the US), or whether it will continue and be worthy of investment.



Mirrorless Rumors is saying wait until Photoplus Expo, starting the 23 of October.


----------



## twoeye (Sep 16, 2013)

Mirrorless Rumors says this week:

http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/new-canon-eos-m-stuff-to-be-announced-this-week/


----------



## mountain_drew (Sep 16, 2013)

twoeye said:


> Mirrorless Rumors says this week:
> 
> http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/new-canon-eos-m-stuff-to-be-announced-this-week/


And yet no one has been invited to anything.


----------



## dude (Sep 18, 2013)

I jumped on the M with the 22mm and the mini zoom (whatever it is) when the fire sale started. Even with the updated firmware, the autofocus speed stinks. High ISO stinks. But walking around with the 22mm on during the day, it serves it's purpose well. 

Would love to see full frame EF mount with eye piece M and dual pixel tech. Basically, take the mirror out of the 1DX or 5Diii and lets see what we get.


----------



## dswtan (Sep 21, 2013)

Apparent M2 mention - interesting catch by Jon A T over at: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3549757


----------



## Triggyman (Oct 21, 2013)

Bob Howland said:


> jhanken said:
> 
> 
> > Any more CR dirt on this?
> ...



I was about to jump on a $399 EOS M with lens and flash today, but good thing I read this thread. 2-3 days of more waiting won't be bad


----------



## DRR (Oct 23, 2013)

I have an EOS M, I bought it pre-firesale, and I love it. I previously had a G12, then a m43, neither one of them gave the quality I wanted, until I tried the M.

One small potential improvement to the "M2" which I haven't heard anyone mention should be a simple one - the addition of a bit of a grip on the right front of the camera, would make it _much_ easier to hold. Even with a pancake lens (22mm) it would not make that depth dimension any larger, but would give you a great ergonomic addition.

The Panasonic Lumix GX7 is a very similarly sized m43 ILC and it has the grip - you can see from a top view photo such as this one, how it adds very little to the size, but it would help you hold the camera without squeezing it, because it gives your fingers a purchase point.







I will probably not upgrade either way, but this is something I would love for them to "upgrade" on the EOS M2.


----------



## bowserb (Nov 22, 2013)

dickgrafixstop said:


> Be nice if Canon would take the Fuji route and provide really good primes. On the other hand, Fuji doesn't have to
> protect Rebel market share and wedge in a product whose only advantage is size.


I generally agree, but the advantage of a mirrorless camera is not just size. I've used Canon DSLRs since 2003 and currently have a 5D2 and 7D plus the GNP of a small nation tied up in lenses and other Canon-specific stuff. For me, the appeal of video with a large sensor and limited depth of field is important. The 5D2 has a Panavision-sized view and the 7D is actually "full frame" cinema size. The problem is, I don't really have the skill or a dedicated assistant to follow focus for video. And the 12 minute scene limit is also from time to time a deal killer. Inability to use the viewfinder for video is another negative.

Yes, size and weight are a consideration as well, but the ability to have full time AF for video is a big deal. Knocking a couple pounds off the weight of an 18-200 lens/camera is a bonus. I need a real eye-level viewfinder, otherwise I'd be jumping on the fire-sale prices on EOS-M's right now. 

As it is, Canon has missed the Christmas season. I presume they're holding the M2 in warehouses to help their distributors unload inventory of EOS-M's and the Rebel-of-the-month. Between Canon and Sony, my Christmas shooting is messed up. I was ready to jump on either the EOS-M2 or the Sony NEX-VG40 APS-C camcorder and move on with either a still cam that does good video or an interchangeable lens camcorder that does good stills. But both Canon and Sony are sitting on their new models, and I don't wish to buy into end-of-life cameras right now.


----------



## jebrady03 (Nov 22, 2013)

Protect Rebel market share? Money is money. Why would Canon care if someone buys either of two equally priced cameras and lenses as long as Canon makes it? The bottom line is what matters, not the assembly line.


----------



## surapon (Nov 22, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> I hope it has full frame and an optical viewfinder and takes EF lenses natively.
> 
> 
> I don't. I don't and I don't.
> ...



+1 for me too, Sir, Dear Mr. Paul.
Yes " I hope it has full frame and an optical viewfinder and takes EF lenses natively." + 1 Customize remote control too.
Surapon


----------



## sdfreeland (Nov 22, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> Protect Rebel market share? Money is money. Why would Canon care if someone buys either of two equally priced cameras and lenses as long as Canon makes it? The bottom line is what matters, not the assembly line.



Equally priced won't mean the same profits though. It could cost more to set up new manufacturing for the M and lenses plus what it took for research and development. Since they have been producing rebels for so long, it's probably very cheap to make anything with similar size.


----------



## mountain_drew (Nov 23, 2013)

surapon said:


> paul13walnut5 said:
> 
> 
> > I hope it has full frame and an optical viewfinder and takes EF lenses natively.
> ...


It can't fit the EF natively because of the flange distance, just like it can't fit the EF-S lenses natively. An adapter will be necessary.

BUT I really, really hope that Canon makes a focal reducer with respectable AF speed. After all, they're already doing it with teleconverters. A focal reducer could virtually make the EOS-M a full frame camera. That would be incredible.


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 23, 2013)

surapon said:


> paul13walnut5 said:
> 
> 
> > I hope it has full frame and an optical viewfinder and takes EF lenses natively.
> ...


This is just my opinion, but I think that a large part of the allure of the micro 4/3 cameras is the small size. If Canon is to compete with the EOS-M they need to keep it small, and going FF means it is going to be fairly close in size to the 6D....


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 23, 2013)

Yup. And thats why I said "I don't. I don't and I don't".

If it's not smaller than an SL1 then what is the bloody point?


----------



## bholliman (Nov 23, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> This is just my opinion, but I think that a large part of the allure of the micro 4/3 cameras is the small size. If Canon is to compete with the EOS-M they need to keep it small, and going FF means it is going to be fairly close in size to the 6D....



A FF EOS M would not have to be as large as a 6D. The new Sony A7 and A7r are between the current M and 6D in size. That said, I don't think a full frame mirror less brings much to the table. The somewhat smaller size (compared with DSLR's) is only a factor with small pancake lenses. For anything 85mm and up, the size of the lens will negate most of the mirrorlesses advantage.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 30, 2013)

I've seen various CR-posters saying something on the lines of "Mirrorless is the future", how soon do you think there will be a similar tiering structure in the Mirrorless lineup as we see in the D-SLR lineup? (e.g. EOS 1M, 5M, 7M)


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 2, 2013)

I love the M, but wish it had the articulating a flip out LCD display, a headphone jack, audio meters on all the time, larger battery, side door for battery and SD card, not the current bottom door. HD 1080p60. Use the full frame capture for HD 1080p without line skipping. Eliminate aliasing and moire. Better low light/available light performance without digital noise. Option to record ProRes 10bit 4.2.2 Built in ND filters. Zoom lens with constant f/2.8. A smooth rocker switch in an easy location for motorized zooming like their high end lenses for video cameras usually have. EF lens mount instead of the EFM. Just make the body a little bit bigger for this EF mount and larger battery with a side door. Continuous non stop recording for video to fill the whole SD card no matter what size card we use. 

Probably higher costs for all of this, but I would pay extra for all those features if they compete with BMPCC and the GH3 around $1000 or less. I got my M with 22mm lens for $300 and the 18-55mmm EFM lens for $135. Extra batteries with chargers were also very low cost. A lot of quality there for a very low price, IMO.

Gary


----------



## jebrady03 (Dec 2, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> I love the M, but wish it had the articulating a flip out LCD display, a headphone jack, audio meters on all the time, larger battery, side door for battery and SD card, not the current bottom door. HD 1080p60. Use the full frame capture for HD 1080p without line skipping. Eliminate aliasing and moire. Better low light/available light performance without digital noise. Option to record ProRes 10bit 4.2.2 Built in ND filters. Zoom lens with constant f/2.8. A smooth rocker switch in an easy location for motorized zooming like their high end lenses for video cameras usually have. EF lens mount instead of the EFM. Just make the body a little bit bigger for this EF mount and larger battery with a side door. Continuous non stop recording for video to fill the whole SD card no matter what size card we use.
> 
> Probably higher costs for all of this, but I would pay extra for all those features if they compete with BMPCC and the GH3 around $1000 or less. I got my M with 22mm lens for $300 and the 18-55mmm EFM lens for $135. Extra batteries with chargers were also very low cost. A lot of quality there for a very low price, IMO.
> 
> Gary



LOL


----------

