# What Do You Want to See in the EOS M System?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 1, 2016)

```
The EOS M system was launched in June 2012 to not much fanfare. It was <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO7rxitFLZg" target="_blank">immediately mocked</a> for perhaps the slowest autofocus in the history of digital cameras. The lack of lenses has also been an issue for the system getting any sort of mainstream acceptance. While Canon has improved the camera from the first iteration up to the current EOS M3, it’s still not a very compelling mirrorless system for a lot of consumers.</p>
<p>I do own the EOS M3 and all of the EF-M lenses, but it’s likely always going to be my last choice walking out the door.</p>
<p>What we want to see in an EOS M camera:</p>
<ul>
<li>A larger camera with better ergonomics</li>
<li>Minimize the number of buttons, some of us have big hands</li>
<li>A built-in EVF, the tech is out there for a good one.</li>
<li>A full frame option in the mirrorless lineup</li>
<li>Find some way to make EF lenses work like they do on a DSLR, this is the hard one.</li>
<li>More native lenses</li>
</ul>
<p>Some people love the EOS M3, and that's cool. If you're happy, I'm happy you're happy. Maybe I'd just like to see the EOS M lineup expanded, more so than flat out replacements of the EOS M3 & EOS M10.</p>
<p>What do you want to see in the EOS M lineup? Do you like the compact size of the current cameras or would you prefer something the size of the Fuji, Sony and Leica offerings?</p>
<p>Sound off in the forum</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## scyrene (Jan 1, 2016)

My heart skipped a beat when I saw that mockup - before reading the headline! I hope it doesn't look like that.


----------



## sjprg (Jan 1, 2016)

I have an original M1 that other than the unusable screen in bright daylight takes excellent images. I use it for tough hikes where the weight and possibility of damage to my DSLRs is a big possibility. The loss of the M1 would be trivial compared to one of the DSLRs. The EF adapter is SLOW granted but that could be fixed. (look how Sony fixed the A7RII to run the Metabones adapter). With a popup EF, that's all I need. The camera I really miss is my old Minolta 7I for hiking. It was LIGHT, An M series built exstreamly light such as the Minolta 7I with the image capability of the M4 would be a hikers delight.


----------



## mb66energy (Jan 1, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> [...]
> 
> <p>What we want to see in an EOS M camera:</p>
> 
> ...



1: not too much larger but some millimeters are acceptable if it helps. Idea: make a large grip to store the larger battery - it wouldn't compromise overall size because the fittet lens is always limiting in this direction.
2: NEVER reduce it too much. I would like to have a "*" button, at least 3 direct control rings - one around the mount would be great. Omit the fiddly multi controller of the EOS M classic.
3: MORE IMPORTANT to me than a built in flash. An EVF with a 90 degree up-tilt would be great.
4: PLEASE - ad 1: a moderate size increasement is more acceptable with FF. But PLEASE use a smaller flange distance, I would like to use my FD lenses on that camera.
5: A FF mirrorless is (for me) not meant as an action camera but more a photographic tool which is compact, lightweight and gives good control over image parameters
6: A set of 6 lenses would be sufficient:
2 zooms: Ultrawide + Wide to moderate telephoto
4 primes: Ultrawide compact, wide with high aperture, moderate tele lens with high aperture, 1 macro 
all with IS, the high aperture primes with USM, the rest with STM

The old EOS M classic is a phantastic camera when it comes to IQ in combination with size and weight. I really like to use it with 10-22 EF-S and 22 EF-M or the FD 1.4 50 S.S.C. alongside the SLRs (equipped with tele lenses).


----------



## jebrady03 (Jan 1, 2016)

I've fallen so in love with FF that I just don't think I'm going to buy an M line camera (again) any time soon. I just don't find the size of my 6D and lenses to be bothersome. That said... 
Canon would have to make a FF M with AF equally fast to PDAF, and allow for tracking, produce some L-series quality lenses in the focal lengths I use, in-camera EVF with practically no lag along with face and eye detection, and a pop-up flash. 
There's a lot more I'd want, but that's the basic requirement for me to even consider the possibility. 
I'd also like a larger, heavier model. I rely on the weight of my camera and lenses to keep my hands steady.


----------



## LDS (Jan 1, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> What do you want to see in the EOS M lineup?



I would like to see something along the line of the G5X. I would buy a Canon mirroless if it is compact enough to be an alternative when the bulkier 5D is not an option. If the design is compact and ergonomic enough, it's the camera I'm looking for - albeit I'd still wish to see if there will be a 100D successor. I'm looking for a second camera to carry around when I need something light and shooting is not the main aim, so I'm not really interested in a DSLR replacement - but something that works almost like a DSLR in a more compact form. Working well with EF lens is a bonus as a backup body.


----------



## NorbR (Jan 1, 2016)

Lenses, lenses, lenses !

I'm growing tired with the M line, and the lack of native lenses is hard to excuse at that point. The line has been around for a while now. 

I really like the IQ out of my M3, and I really *really* like the EF-M 11-22mm lens, so if nothing else I'm going to keep these two glued together for a while. Other than that, I have absolutely no interest in more M bodies, unless of course a FF line comes out soon ...


----------



## brunerww (Jan 1, 2016)

I would buy an EF-M mount EOS M4 mirrorless if Canon gave it the feature-set and price of the $1100 Panasonic GX8 - with a Canon APS-C sized sensor and a headphone jack, e.g.:

- 4k video
- 1080/60p video
- EVF
- 3.5mm mic jack
- 3.5mm headphone jack
- no 30 minute recording limit

Otherwise, I'll stay with Panasonic, thanks.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 1, 2016)

Until the functional limitations of mirrorless are overcome (particularly in terms of AF, also battery life and ergonomics), I won't consider a MILC as a dSLR replacement. Therefore, the key desire _for me_ is size/portability. I like the size of the M2. 

What I'd like to see are a few more native lenses, particularly a fast(ish) short tele prime.


----------



## oncosurgdoc (Jan 1, 2016)

If I wanted a larger camera, I'd purchase a regular slr. The advantage of the Eos M system is that it is small and light, useful for outdoor activities such as backpacking or long-distance bicycling, where it would be hard to lug along a full-size camera. I dislike the Powershots because of the poor lens options, and absence of serious control of the image. Thus, my list would be
1. Light, light, light. The lighter and smaller, the better
2. gps?
3. Ability to visualize the screen (or image) in bright light without having to lug along a hotshoe adaptor
4. speed! 
5. possibility of an adaptor that allows regular batteries. It's hard to charge the Canon batteries when you are deep in the woods.
6. Higher range of brightness/darkness
Just my two cents worth


----------



## josephandrews222 (Jan 1, 2016)

*What Many Seem to Want in Canon Mirrorless is a 5D Mark M*

I have a lot to say on this topic but not a lot of time. I hope to bring more light than heat to this thread...

It sounds to me like what some well-intentioned folks want is a mirrorless Canon that can replace their 5DMkIII--in every way that a professional photographer can think of.

I believe that this would be a fabulous body. I would want one of those, too.

Perhaps such a camera could be called a '5D Mark M'.

But in my mind the essence of the M-series of mirrorless cameras centers on the APS-C sensor and the benefits of size and weight reduction (including ES-M lenses) that go along with that choice of sensor (as opposed to full-frame).

So the next 'M', in my mind, is a different camera that many traditional Canon DSLR shooters are used to, in that (like the previous Ms) compromises based on size and weight reduction will be made (as opposed to the mirrorless 5DMkIII described above)...because the M is NOT designed to replace a Single Digit D in the Canon line.

Therefore, in my mind, when the M3 is replaced (an M4?), here is my wish list:

1. make it as small as possible
2. make it as light as possible
3. make it as responsive as possible
4. make it auto-focus better
5. do not include a viewfinder but improve the usability of the LCD screen
6. do include an onboard flash
7. use a sensor that works as well as possible in low light

I love using my 5D Mark III. It is a VERY useful tool.

But it is not an 'M'. I love using my M and M2, as well--especially for family vacations and street photography.

Full-frame shooters who thumb their noses at the M series do so at their own peril.

Thanks for reading.


----------



## Generalized Specialist (Jan 1, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>Sound off in the forum</p>
> <span id="pty_trigger"></span>[/html]



Ha! You all know Canon would never build this. It would compete with it's own DSLR's and might take sales away. Or, if Canon does build something like it, it would be so crippled, again so not to compete with it's own offering's, it would be yet another sales dog like the M series has been.

Having said that, this IS the camera we want and we are willing to pay for. Rough edit - make it Leica Q sized, good auto and manual focusing, good manual controls and handling and able to use exising EF lenses. Done. We all know Canon could create this using mostly off the shelf components, they just have to design a body to house it in, how hard can this be?


----------



## Pompo (Jan 1, 2016)

*Re: Like a Sony A7s II with Canon EF lenses and 18 mlix*

All I want is a body like a Sony A7s II with Canon EF lenses and 18 mpix and better AF


----------



## Quackator (Jan 1, 2016)

I have 10D, 1D MkII, 450D, 5D MkII, 5D MkIII, 1D-X, M1 and M3.

Plenty of choice, and plenty of experience.

That said: The size and ergonomics of the 5D MkIII would be the 
ideal FF mirrorless for me, with an adaptor that allows to use 
EF-lenses with tilt/shift. A sensor with better DR and/or color 
rendition and some more ISO. A sensor capable of real RGB might 
be the best performer in colored LED event lighting.

But what I'm after more than anything else is a global shutter 
that will eliminate x-sync forever. Flash at any shutter speed 
you like, imagine!

Ah yeah: The M3 with the 22mm pancake is always on me. 
Always.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 1, 2016)

One thing: Canon wants to sell cameras. 
As long as they sell more cameras than anybody else at a good profit, 
they couldn't care less if their customers buy DSLR or mirrorless.

Selling cameras for profit is their business model,
not making sure that all these cameras are DSLRs.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 1, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> <ul>
> <li>A larger camera with better ergonomics</li>
> <li>Minimize the number of buttons, some of us have big hands</li>
> <li>A built-in EVF, the tech is out there for a good one.</li>
> ...



1. A larger camera but not a heavier one. The G5X is too small for use with its viewfinder. If I want a heavy camera, I'll use my 5D3 with the battery pack. As for "better ergonomics", that can mean different, even contradictory, things to different people.

2. Fewer buttons? Larger buttons perhaps but not fewer. What would you suggest instead, a touchscreen-oriented, menu driven interface? That's the last thing I want. After using my G7x for 7 weeks and a G10 for 5 years, I've gotten quite used to them.

3. A built-in EVF -- absolutely, just so long as it is at least as good as the one in the G5X. 

4. A full-frame mirrorless option. Using what lens mount??? Arguably this subject belongs in its own thread. In fact, there was a fairly long thread on this subject a few months back and I'm sure there have been others.

5. Use EF lenses seamlessly. Absolutely! Otherwise, why buy it instead of a Sony or Fuji? I also want something like a Metabones speed booster, 1-stop is acceptable, but 1-1/3 stop is preferred and I don't care if it costs $1000 if it's a quality optic.

6. More native lenses. Assuming 5. above happens, I only care about a tiny, native 15-85 f/3.5-5.6.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 1, 2016)

In my mind, the only real advantage to removing the mirror and making a mirrorless camera is the size and weight reduction. It's somewhat funny to me how many folks want their mirrorless to be more and more like their DSLR. If they are so similar, why get the mirrorless? I think camera makers are smart enough to realize that making the same basic camera in both DSLR and mirrorless format would be redundant (and stupid). The key to selling mirrorless is if it offers something that you can't get in a DSLR. At the moment, this means make it small and light.


----------



## douglaurent (Jan 1, 2016)

I want Canon to stop wasting time on the stupid EOS M system and simply release a mirrorless 5D with everything an A7R2 has to offer, plus more. 4K video, high megapixel count and lowlight capability won't come in small sensor compact size cameras. All who don't need good video, a lot of megapixels or lowlight can simply use their phones. Maybe Canon should think about manufacturing phones?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 1, 2016)

Quackator said:


> One thing: Canon wants to sell cameras.
> As long as they sell more cameras than anybody else at a good profit,
> they couldn't care less if their customers buy DSLR or mirrorless.
> 
> ...



True. 

But...significant development spend in a segment that represents a minor fraction of the overall market is likely not profitable _when you already dominate the major fraction of the market_. Canon and Nikon seem quite happy to let Sony/Fuji/etc. fight over the market scraps until such time as MILC growth makes that a financially attractive segment of the market (and currently, MILC 'growth' is essentially flat).


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 1, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Until the functional limitations of mirrorless are overcome (particularly in terms of AF, also battery life and ergonomics), I won't consider a MILC as a dSLR replacement. Therefore, the key desire _for me_ is size/portability. I like the size of the M2.
> 
> What I'd like to see are a few more native lenses, particularly a fast(ish) short tele prime.




+1. This. Canon, for a boatload of reasons, is very very very hesitant to go big with mirrorless. 

I continue to argue that (beyond the obvious 'threat to their SLR sales' reason) Canon is waiting for the market to make up it's mind about mirrorless: should it be *smaller than a same-sensored SLR* or should it be *as comprehensive / capable as a pro SLR platform*?

As much as all of us may believe the answer to that is obvious, it is not. There are two large and distinct groups that want fairly different systems here, and Canon is dragging its feet to avoid making the wrong call. So as much they have SLR cannibalization to fear with a mirrorless offering, Canon also may make the wrong new product investments and lose a lot of money.

Back to my small vs. comprehensive question: if you argue the former = Canon should cap focal lengths to something reasonable and keep the aggregate lens + body size small. Think APS-C. Think Fuji. Yes, Fuji are selling some longer glass now, but they are a very attractive smaller rig option for more bread and butter focal lengths, say 24-85 (FF equivalent) or so. IQ is solid, controls are intuitive and their users seem very happy. This path should heavily beef up EOS-M's functionality/features (many many threads on this already, nothing new to say here) and native EF-M lens offerings.

If you argue the latter = mirrorless' appeal is far more about what mirrorless can do _better_ than a traditional OVF SLR and less about size. If that is where the market goes, Canon should bite the bullet and go straight FF mirrorless and let folks bolt standard EF glass on it. 

- A


----------



## noncho (Jan 1, 2016)

1. Lenses - fast and nice primes with few better zooms (F4 at least).
2. Performance - put a 70D performance in a mirrorless body. 1-2 FPS with M3 + continuous focus is a joke!


----------



## bholliman (Jan 1, 2016)

My M1 kit is just a small/light alternative to my DSLR system. My DSLR's are almost always my first choice and I just grab my M if I'm looking to go really small or inconspicuous. The ability to use my EF lenses and speedlites is a really big plus for the system.

My main priority for the next M body would be to keep it small, light and inexpensive with a big AF improvement. Additional lenses, ideally fast primes in the 35 to 85mm range would be nice.


----------



## 30mmgunpilot (Jan 1, 2016)

I'm a heretic. Just sold my 60d and a couple L lenses, and went "all in" with an M3, with just a 22 2.0 m mount, 11-22 m mount, 18-135 STM, and EVF. 

I fly a lot and ride motorcycles a lot. I left my old camera and lenses at home a lot, too. While IQ was phenomenal, the package was too cumbersome for my environment. Which meant I tried to catch some amazing "on the fly" photos (bears, Bobcats, other aircraft, etc) with either my iPhone or canon s110. Yeah, you can crop in and see they were there, but nothing print-worthy. The IQ of the L lenses didn't do squat sitting back home.

I bought the M3 and tried out the L lenses with it. USM autofocus was too slow. Sad. Very pleased with the 2 m mount lenses, and the 18-135 STM works pretty darn good, too.

So what would I like to see? How about STM on the 70-200L series? That would be mighty tasty for dedicated "known" opportunities. 

The 18-135 STM combo fits easily in my motorcycle tank bag for quick access, and sits on my cockpit Dashboard unobtrusively. Nope, it's not an L, but it beats the heck out of my trusty s110. And that 24.2 mp sensor is a beaut!

---Rob


----------



## photogdan (Jan 1, 2016)

Unless they introduce an aggressive, balls-out, mirrorless system whose goal is to be king of the hill, I'll probably abandon Canon altogether.

I've owned a 70D, M1 and now have a 6D and an M3. I loved my 70D but I love the IQ on the 6D better. The M1 was just OK, I only purchased it because it was cheap and I wanted something lighter. I've been impressed by the IQ on the M3. It's great if you live in a Canon bubble with a bunch of Canon EF/EF-s glass. Once you start exploring the competitors, you quickly realize just how much the M3 lacks. It's easy to ignore the findings because of your prior investment in Canon glass. 

That said, I want to see:


Full frame mirrorless
At least 28MP
IBIS
Top tier low light performance (Backlit sensor?)
Ability to use existing Canon glass with above average AF performance and dual pixel AF
Built-in EVF
Articulating touch LCD
4K video
Headphone jack 
Competitive price (somewhere between the Panasonic GX8 and Sony's A7RII) I'm willing to pay a premium but don't be ridiculous


This might sound like wishful thinking but all the technology exists. Canon's approach of providing only incremental updates is getting old. They need to stop BSing and swing for the fences. Heck, I'd be happy to see that feature set in a DSLR. I'm encouraged by the 6DMII rumors.

Sure, plenty of arguments for why not this or that definitely exist. I think most will agree Canon has been dragging their feet. Another incremental, half-baked update will be an insult to Canon loyalists and probably the last straw for me.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 1, 2016)

I'd like a viewfinder; a touch screen; a flip screen; the 7DII sensor; accept EF-S and EF lenses natively, be about 4.6 x 3.6 x 2.7 inches and have a badge on the front that says SL2.


----------



## Bernard (Jan 1, 2016)

I use my two Ms (m1, M3) all the time, so obviously I like the overall concept.

Here's what I suggest for future models.

Keep two models, a tiny one like the original M and a bigger one like the M3. The only reason to go bigger than the M3 is for a full-frame.

Stop crippling the video. We all know that Canon can do a 4K camera with clean HDMI. Do they think that they would lose C300 sales to the M3m2?

The M3 replacement should have a built-in tiltable EVF. 

If they do decide to go full-frame, then don't mess around. Make a competitor the the Leica SL: give it the toughest body, highest shooting speed , best battery, and best viewfinder. Most of all, make sure it's designed by photographers, for photographers, like the 1Dx. Don't do like Sony and release a half-assed fiddly camera with a tiny battery and Labyrinth-like interface, while holding-back features for the next fiscal quarter's replacement camera.

I am mostly happy with the lens choice. The system could use a wider prime in the 15-18 range. The biggest problem with lenses is that the EF-to-M adapter is overpriced.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 1, 2016)

Really simple:
1. APS-C: 2 models, one small, dirt-cheap and simple (M10), and one hi-end, sized like M3, but built-in top-notch EVF plus sensor as good as Samsung NX-1/NX-500 plus AF system at least as good as Sony A6000 plus regular EOS UI (not Powershot firmware!). Grip can be a bit bigger to accomodate LP-E6N battery to give it 500+ shots. Price definitely below 999 body only.
Existing EF-M lens lineup is perfectly fine, just add a compact short portrait tele e.g. EF-M 80/2.4 IS STM. Plus a firmware update for the EF/EF-M adapter to provide full AF speed with USM EF lenses.

2. FF sensor: just copy Sony A7 II family, bring 3 FF models - one fast shooting, one hi-rez, one "cine" version to keep the "it must have 4k" crowd happy. Not bigger and definitely not more expensive. To make it a full success bring a sensible line-up of new native short-flange back lenses that are as cheap and optically good as the EF-M ones. Expensive L lenses to be added later on. Make sure Canon RT radio wireless transmitter is built in, next to WIFI, NFC and GPS - all of them switched off by default. And buy the bloody 42MP sensor from Sony, rather than messing about in your own fab. 

So easy. just do it, Canon!


----------



## fentiger (Jan 1, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> I want Canon to stop wasting time on the stupid EOS M system and simply release a mirrorless 5D with everything an A7R2 has to offer, plus more. 4K video, high megapixel count and lowlight capability won't come in small sensor compact size cameras. All who don't need good video, a lot of megapixels or lowlight can simply use their phones. Maybe Canon should think about manufacturing phones?


Granted Canon don't make phones, but they do make other things like Printers, calculators, fax, medical scanners, eye testing equipment, so they won't exactly go bust if one or two of us switch to Sony!!


----------



## dolina (Jan 1, 2016)

Make it medium format so it is something distinctly different.

All these mirrorless cameras have the same sensor size with very minimal weight or size reduction. A major draw to buy a mirrorless.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 1, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Really simple...
> So easy. just do it, Canon!



Easy if they didn't have to worry about pesky things like making a profit.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 1, 2016)

Bob Howland said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > <ul>
> ...



I never need to change settings outside of ISO and using the play button, the rest of those buttons are useless. There's no need for 11 buttons and a jogwheel, plus 2 dials on top. It even has a touchscreen! The ergonomics of the M3 are lazy and inefficient.


----------



## TAF (Jan 1, 2016)

How about FF, EF mount, with the EVF on top.

ie: a baby Hasselblad in physical shape/layout.

Lots of room for controls and batteries. Very easy to make using 'parts bin' engineering other than for the actual body itself (which any engineering intern could design in Solidworks in a month and have fabbed by a prototype shop in a week).


----------



## Tinky (Jan 1, 2016)

I actually loved the original m, used with single point on shot af and fw2 it was acceptable, but for video, my main use, af didn't come into it (for me)

The 22mm is a peach, the iq good.

But.

I sold the lesser used of my M's and have just bought my second Panasonic g7, and of course a metabones xl.

I'm loving the g7's. The 7d has went, the 60d may be next.

I'm keeping my ef lenses asthey actually work well via the metabones. Maybe one day Canon will come up with a 4k h264 rebel for g7 money?


----------



## photogdan (Jan 1, 2016)

unfocused said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Really simple...
> ...



If they "just did it", profits would be the least of their worries. One could argue that Sony "just did it" .... a few times. All without a negative impact on profits.


----------



## Machaon (Jan 1, 2016)

Mirrorless might become interesting when it offers:

Full Frame sensor
Integrated EVF with no noticable lag and usuable at night
Lens line-up with faster aperture and IQ
Large enough to fit comfortably in a man's hand, and with Canon's superb ergonomics

Basically, it needs to be a light 5D III, with a next generation sensor.


----------



## 7enderbender (Jan 1, 2016)

Pretty simple: a full frame camera with an optical rangefinder and available fast lenses, especially a 50mm and a 28. Ideally easily compatible with old FD lenses. Basically, a Leica type system that doesn't cost 10 grand or more. 
Hey, let me go crazy and dream up a designated b/w sensor for this - perhaps interchangeable - like an old film back. Now that would be something to get excited about. Otherwise I haven't seen any new cameras or announcements anywhere that make me consider using anything but my 5Dii with mostly my 50L and 135L.


----------



## Stuart (Jan 1, 2016)

All of the headline items are great. 
A decent mirrorless should be smaller as no mirror box; faster & quieter(silent).
But the depth of the mirror box area is not a problem for my hands/shooting - don't fuss with reducing this dimension - instead leave it and the EF lenses we love.
Or if you must reduce that dimension just supply and active extension tube until you have new lenses available.


----------



## RGF (Jan 1, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>What we want to see in an EOS M camera:</p>
> <ul>
> <li>A larger camera with better ergonomics</li>
> <li>Minimize the number of buttons, some of us have big hands</li>
> ...



Sounds good. Like too AF, ideal 4K but at least 1080P, use all EF lens (and possibly EF-S).

Not sure if I want FF or crop. A high crop will great extend long glass but make WA impossible.

How about voice recognition (a la Siri). Wouldn't be nice to be able to say (Camera name F8, increase exposure comp by 1/3 stop, ...). Cameras will need a name to avoid confusion in crowded area. This will reduce battery life but that is the cost.

Why not high FPS (at least in one model).

Some else I would like to see, either in an M body or an EOS body, is auto focus stacking. You pick the 2 end pts and the camera steps focus.


----------



## mpphoto (Jan 1, 2016)

I bought an M3 with the electronic viewfinder a month ago. So far, I am pleased with the image quality using the 22mm lens and my EF-S 55-250mm STM with adapter. I find it easy to transfer photos via WiFi to iOS devices. Seems like most people have a hard time with Canon's WiFi and apps.

My biggest complaint about the M3 is its autofocusing in AF Servo and burst mode. It just doesn't continue focusing as the subject moves and you continue shooting frames. I don't expect to use the M3 to shoot a hockey game, but its AF should be able to handle moving cars or animals. Dustin Abbott had a similar issue in his review - see the section with the dog photos.

The build quality could be improved. It sounds like the original M was quite good, but reviews say the M3 is not as good. I've never used the M, so I cannot speak about the differences. The M3 feels alright to me. Not bad, not great. I am concerned about the blue Review button on my M3. It creaks and I do not feel confident about its durability. I think the positioning and number of buttons and dials is just right. Love the dedicated exposure compensation dial.

I'd like to see a small EF-M macro lens. I can use the EF adapter, but when you consider the bulk of that plus the EF-S 60mm or EF 100mm L Macro, I might as well use a DSLR. While pleased with the performance and handling of the EF-S 55-250 with adapter, I just got the EF-M 55-200mm yesterday because of the smaller size.

I have owned a Sony a6000 for a year. It's a decent camera and it does pretty well focusing on moving objects, something the M3 fails at. Sony's E 55-250mm lens stinks compared to Canon's EF-S 55-250 STM and EF-M 55-200. I was impressed by the combo of the a6000 with the EF-S 55-250mm STM on an adapter, even though I had to manually focus. Beside the E 50mm and E 18-105mm G, I'm not a fan of Sony's glass. 

I'm not sure if I prefer the a6000 or M3 more. I feel more comfortable with the M3 and find it easier to get good photos with the M3 and my Canon lenses. For my eyes and glasses, the M3's optional viewfinder is easier to use than the a6000's built-in viewfinder. The a6000 lacks a touchscreen (What was Sony thinking?), and I like the M3's touchscreen. However, the a6000 feels more fully-featured and the AF system and 11 fps burst mode beat the M3 handily. The M3 feels like an interchangeable lens version of my G15.

Bernard mentioned the EF to EF-M adapter being overpriced. Not sure where he is, but B&H sells a white box version for $50. I consider that a fair price for a lens adapter.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 1, 2016)

I have both the M and the M3.
AF on the M3 is significantly better than on the M.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 1, 2016)

photogdan said:


> Unless they introduce an aggressive, balls-out, mirrorless system whose goal is to be king of the hill, I'll probably abandon Canon altogether.
> 
> I've owned a 70D, M1 and now have a 6D and an M3. I loved my 70D but I love the IQ on the 6D better. The M1 was just OK, I only purchased it because it was cheap and I wanted something lighter. I've been impressed by the IQ on the M3. It's great if you live in a Canon bubble with a bunch of Canon EF/EF-s glass. Once you start exploring the competitors, you quickly realize just how much the M3 lacks. It's easy to ignore the findings because of your prior investment in Canon glass.
> 
> ...



Bye then.


----------



## Styrofoto (Jan 1, 2016)

-I'm always stumbling over some button I didn't mean to push. Better layout/ergonomics would be nice.
-55-200 lens performs well, but I can't believe I own a lens with a plastic mount. Maybe that's a personal prejudice, but I haven't seen a plastic mount since I sold my old Nifty Fifty.
-How about tethered capture? Or maybe that's an Adobe issue, haven't researched it further.

Really, I like the system. It's easy to carry anywhere, in a very small bag, with all the lenses. Great for hikes/nature walks, etc. Not so good for sports, photographing fast-moving kids, etc. I'm really happy with the image quality. I think the system has a lot of potential.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 1, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Less buttons = more time in menus = takes longer to change the camera's settings whilst shooting.
> 
> More user definable buttons would be better and spaced so that they can be operated distinctively whilst wearing gloves in the snow during winter.



Look on the back of a Leica Q or Leica M. Even some of those buttons aren't needed. I honestly have no idea what people are changing in their cameras consistently that they need so many buttons and dials, especially on a camera like an EOS M.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 2, 2016)

I'm not feeling the love for the M around here. Anyhow, 12mm, 35mm, 55mm and 75mm primes @ f/2-2.2 (one of the last two with macro capability). Obviously faster AF and at least a little taste of functional servo. Larger buffer and faster frame rate. And why the hell can't the M-Fn button be used to toggle the shutter wheel between shutter speed and ISO? Some faster zooms would be nice, but I don't want to be too demanding...


----------



## Zv (Jan 2, 2016)

I'd like better ergonomics, the M3 is a step in the right direction. I haven't used one but I see it has dials on it. Ideally I'd like a front dial and rear dial - same as all Canon DSLRs to easily change the two most important settings, shutter speed and aperture. An ISO button might be useful if placed well and finally a drive mode button. Everything else can live in the Q menu accessed via touchscreen. 

Trying to change shutter speed on the original M even with the thinnest of gloves is a pain in the ass. It keeps shifting the curser over to aperture or presses the star button. That dial is tiny and useless.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 2, 2016)

By the time they did enough to the M to make me interested, it would be an SLR.


----------



## Jopa (Jan 2, 2016)

The camera manufacturers can make small cameras but they can't beat physics and make small lenses. So at the end the camera size doesn't matter if you put a large tele lens on it. I could care less if it's a mirrorless or not as long as it has 1) fast AF 2) accepts EF lenses. After shooting a few years the Sony A7-series cameras I'm really tired of very limited native lens selection, random adapters and slow/unreliable AF via adapters. I hope Canon won't make the same mistake by introducing a new FF mirrorless mount. Tried the "Sony way" already - no thanks, don't want the same [email protected] from Canon


----------



## pwp (Jan 2, 2016)

If it means needing to charge $3k or more for an all-out brilliant, full featured, fast AF, industry best EVF, high performance M then I just wish Canon had the guts to just go for it. They will eventually. The current form factor/design of all DSLR's has its conceptual roots in film cameras. Historically the current crop of DSLR's will be seen as transitional. Maintaining the familiar form factor helped make the migration from film SLR to digital DSLR appealingly palatable, and was a marketing master-stroke. Fast forward another decade and it's likely we'll be grateful that we no longer work with clunky DSLR's. There's a bright future for a properly evolved professional level M.

I'd love a glimpse behind the closed doors of the R&D departments of Canon and Nikon. Alongside the predictable conservative developments would be a vision of the future, and I'm saying that will be mirrorless. Just give them time...

-pw


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

pwp said:


> The current form factor/design of all DSLR's has its conceptual roots in film cameras. Historically the current crop of DSLR's will be seen as transitional. Maintaining the familiar form factor helped make the migration from film SLR to digital DSLR appealingly palatable, and was a marketing master-stroke. Fast forward another decade and it's likely we'll be grateful that we no longer work with clunky DSLR's.



The form factor of film cameras provided good ergonomics, as do dSLRs. Holding a small MILC in your hand for a day's shooting is not a pleasant experience, particularly with a large, fast lens (f/2.8 zoom, for example) mounted.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 2, 2016)

So, in less than four pages there are maybe 30 different scenarios, almost all of them in conflict with one another.

Simple? Not.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 2, 2016)

unfocused said:


> So, in less than four pages there are maybe 30 different scenarios, almost all of them in conflict with one another.
> 
> Simple? Not.



You're absolutely correct, that's why I did the post. I think it really sheds light on the difficulties manufacturers face when developing a mirrorless system.


----------



## candc (Jan 2, 2016)

I have been using an a7rii for about a month now and like it a lot. Its by far the best camera I have ever used with manual focus lenses. I like the size and the way it handles. The crop mode works the way it should. You see an aps-c size image in the finder and get a 18mp raw file. I would like to see canon make a similar type camera with a high resolution ff dpaf sensor and a built in rt flash trigger. Get rid of all the extra buttons and dials and give it a touchscreen


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > So, in less than four pages there are maybe 30 different scenarios, almost all of them in conflict with one another.
> ...



In the case of Canon and Nikon I think those difficulties are self-imposed, based on the size (relatively small) of the mirrorless market. 

Consider that Canon dSLRs range from the comparatively tiny SL1 to the comparatively large 1D X, with 3-4 intermediate sizes, comprising five current levels of APS-C bodies and three levels of FF bodies. If Canon were to make a comparable investment in the MILC segment, it's quite likely there would be 'something for everyone'. However, it seems the size of the MILC market simply isn't substantial enough to justify that sort of investment.


----------



## JoeDavid (Jan 2, 2016)

This is an easy one. I'd like something along the lines of the Fujifilm X-E2 but with a DPAF sensor and better IQ than Canon's current crop of sensors. The patent with the on-sensor A/Ds may go a ways at improving noise and DR. It would be good to be able to use EF and EF-S lenses with it but smaller, L quality lenses would be preferred. I'm perfectly fine with my photo backpack and a 5D3, 5Ds, and 4 or 5 lenses most of the time but there are times when I'd like to have a much smaller kit and appear more armature and less "professional". I'd pre-order something like the X-E2 with a next generation DPAF sensor and a smaller EF-M 24-105/4L IS in a heartbeat.


----------



## russ (Jan 2, 2016)

I agree with most of what you say but Canon should shoot higher for the APS version. Show the world Canon makes the best APS and FF cameras (mirrorless or otherwise) once again.

Yes, Canon needs to embrace the future and fully go for mirrorless and makes sense to do both APS and FF. I'd probably get both- the APS for travel (to keep it small so I can carry on all my camera gear) and FF for more local shooting and landscapes. My 1DX is amazing but not something I care to travel with and I travel a lot right now.

In short a FF body that competes head to head with Sony A7RII FF mirrorless but takes Canon flash and existing EF lenses (heck, a lot of Sony folks use Canon lenses because Sony still doesn't have a good inventory of high end lenses). That means a new Canon sensor since the newer Canon FF ISO performance and dynamic range don't compete with Sony (or Nikon 810).

For APS side- Give us a 7D mirrorless camera (smaller, lighter but still built tough with same performance). Same EOS 5D/7D basic control layout or something close. EX-RT Flash support is a must. It doesn't have to be super small and I'd argue the M3 is too small. My travel camera, the Fuji X-T1 size is really nice and has a nice set of lenses now. The Fuji control layout is killer- really fast to change exposure compensation, ISO and focus points. For Canon to compete they need good ergonomics (eg. EOS 1D, 5D, 7D like controls). That said, all I need from Fuji is remote TTL flash ala Canon 600ex-rt + controller (make the controller smaller though Canon!) and I'd have little reason to come back to Canon for my travel camera.

For lower end APS- Canon already has the M3 so keep it in the lineup as the low end. Sure hope it's much better than the M1 I owned for a while before realizing I couldn't get around the poor and unpredictable autofocus (thank you, EBay).

Do I think any of the above will happen? Not really. Canon doesn't have the vision or fortitude to make bold steps like Fuji or Sony. Still hoping I'm wrong. I've been with Canon since EOS-1 film days and got the original D30 (late 2000) and have owned the 1D, 1D-mkII, mkIII, mkIV and still have the 1DX shooting 100s of thousands of frames with my 1D bodies. Very disappointed by Canon (and Nikon for that matter since I owned the V1 for a bit)

Russ



AvTvM said:


> Really simple:
> 1. APS-C: 2 models, one small, dirt-cheap and simple (M10), and one hi-end, sized like M3, but built-in top-notch EVF plus sensor as good as Samsung NX-1/NX-500 plus AF system at least as good as Sony A6000 plus regular EOS UI (not Powershot firmware!). Grip can be a bit bigger to accomodate LP-E6N battery to give it 500+ shots. Price definitely below 999 body only.
> Existing EF-M lens lineup is perfectly fine, just add a compact short portrait tele e.g. EF-M 80/2.4 IS STM. Plus a firmware update for the EF/EF-M adapter to provide full AF speed with USM EF lenses.
> 
> ...


----------



## 1Zach1 (Jan 2, 2016)

I'd rather not see a larger camera, I love the M because it's a portable option over a DSLR. Adding a mirrorless version of the Rebel or something would be fine, but I want to see advanced options in a camera the size of the M3, not being forced to something larger, or having to settle a sub-part portable camera.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> In the case of Canon and Nikon I think those difficulties are self-imposed, based on the size (relatively small) of the mirrorless market.
> 
> Consider that Canon dSLRs range from the comparatively tiny SL1 to the comparatively large 1D X, with 3-4 intermediate sizes, comprising five current levels of APS-C bodies and three levels of FF bodies. If Canon were to make a comparable investment in the MILC segment, it's quite likely there would be 'something for everyone'. However, it seems the size of the MILC market simply isn't substantial enough to justify that sort of investment.



I think it goes beyond that, to the form factor itself, which may be the real limiting factor, and much harder to overcome than Nikon's and Canon's assessments of the market. Indeed, the limits of the core design may be what limits the market. 

There are solid reasons why the SLR form beat out the rangefinder form and relegated rangefinders to a very small niche dominated by Leica. Many of these reasons have already been cited here, with the most problematic being that the traditional rangefinder form lends itself very well to lenses in the 35mm to 135 mm range, but not to lenses much wider or much longer. These digital rangefinder bodies fill a niche, but aren't versatile enough to truly threaten DSLRs, especially when manufacturers are now making affordable 600mm zooms and under 20mm wide angles for DSLRs

On the other hand, the electronic viewfinder mirrorless cameras that mimic SLRS may ultimately replace true SLRs once the viewfinder technology surpasses the exquisite simplicity of the single lens reflex. But, the traditional mirror design sets a high bar, since it requires no power, is as reliable as physics and as fast as the speed of light. When and if EVFs surpass mirrors, the cameras will look very much like our current DSLRs, likely be about the same size, will be available in the same variety of bodies and will certainly accept the same lenses. Evolution, not revolution.


----------



## distant.star (Jan 2, 2016)

.
Easy...

They subcontract the whole deal out to Staples.

They'll produce a one-button camera, and every time you push the button it takes the picture and says, "That was easy."


----------



## michi (Jan 2, 2016)

Minimize buttons? Heck no, more buttons. The more direct control the better. That's a really odd request in my opinion.

I had the original M. Kinda liked it, but not enough. Was willing to spend money on a system but when all the interesting lenses were not available in the US and it was iffy if the system would continue, I lost interest. My small carry everywhere camera is now a SL1. Love that thing. Can't wait for a SL2. At this point I don't think Canon can convince me to buy into another system again.


----------



## TeT (Jan 2, 2016)

my wants for the M would be Pop up, hot shoe, EVF, touch, C1 C2 modes, lots of sensitive focus points, quick focus no lag... 

The IQ is fine, FF would be nice, I would have to realign my lens lineup a little for APC & everyday use...


----------



## candc (Jan 2, 2016)

michi said:


> Minimize buttons? Heck no, more buttons. The more direct control the better. That's a really odd request in my opinion.
> 
> I had the original M. Kinda liked it, but not enough. Was willing to spend money on a system but when all the interesting lenses were not available in the US and it was iffy if the system would continue, I lost interest. My small carry everywhere camera is now a SL1. Love that thing. Can't wait for a SL2. At this point I don't think Canon can convince me to buy into another system again.



The standard canon dslr setup with a dial on top and the wheel on the back is all that's needed. The new a7 cameras have 4 control dials, one in front of the shutter button, one on top, an ec dial to the right and the wheel on the back. That's 2 more than needed and gets confusing because they do different things in different modes and sometimes do nothing at all.


----------



## michi (Jan 2, 2016)

candc said:


> The standard canon dslr setup with a dial on top and the wheel on the back is all that's needed. The new a7 cameras have 4 control dials, one in front of the shutter button, one on top, an ec dial to the right and the wheel on the back. That's 2 more than needed and gets confusing because they do different things in different modes and sometimes do nothing at all.



If you use your camera frequently enough, you can get used to pretty much anything. Again, I just think the request for less buttons from a camera enthusiast is odd. Might as well buy some type of point and shoot. I love being able to customize buttons and have as much direct control as possible available. You don't have to use it, but it's nice to have it. Just don't give Canon ideas...


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 2, 2016)

pwp said:


> The current form factor/design of all DSLR's has its conceptual roots in film cameras. Historically the current crop of DSLR's will be seen as transitional. Maintaining the familiar form factor helped make the migration from film SLR to digital DSLR appealingly palatable, and was a marketing master-stroke. Fast forward another decade and it's likely we'll be grateful that we no longer work with clunky DSLR's.



I've been hearing that same story for the last 15 years.

Actually, I'm not that fond of the SLR form factor despite using it for 35 years. However, modern mirrorless cameras are in an even less desirable form factor.

I prefer the camcorder form factor.







This approach keeps you from having to make that weird 60 degree sideways turn with your wrist, and it puts the weight in the palm of your hand rather than cantilevered off your wrist. I've tried it, and I can hold 15kg like this without much issue - in one hand.

I'd love to see a proper SLR (including OVF and mirror box) in that format.


----------



## candc (Jan 2, 2016)

michi said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > The standard canon dslr setup with a dial on top and the wheel on the back is all that's needed. The new a7 cameras have 4 control dials, one in front of the shutter button, one on top, an ec dial to the right and the wheel on the back. That's 2 more than needed and gets confusing because they do different things in different modes and sometimes do nothing at all.
> ...



Sure, I am all for direct control of what's needed. The buttons are okay as long as you don't accidentally press them. In Av or TV mode you need a dial to select aperture or shutter speed, and one for ec. Manual you need one for aperture and one for shutter. That's 2. I don't see why you want 4 dials.


----------



## michi (Jan 2, 2016)

candc said:


> Sure, I am all for direct control of what's needed. The buttons are okay as long as you don't accidentally press them. In Av or TV mode you need a dial to select aperture or shutter speed, and one for ec. Manual you need one for aperture and one for shutter. That's 2. I don't see why you want 4 dials.



I never said anything about four dials, not sure where you got that from. I was trying to make a point. Don't tell Canon to give us less controls. I found the statement of requesting less buttons really odd. That's all. If I had the choice, I would rather have more than less.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> I prefer the camcorder form factor.



Perhaps with a small lens. Hang a 70-300L on the front, not so much. Also, I've put my light little camcorder on a ballhead, it would be a PITA with a heavy load. Maybe fluid heads would become the norm? Lots of extra weight and bulk though. 

No, I think the dSLR form factor is here to stay, for good reason. I agree with unfocused that when 'mirrorless kills the dSLR' we'll basically have dSLRs without a mirror.


----------



## candc (Jan 2, 2016)

michi said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > Sure, I am all for direct control of what's needed. The buttons are okay as long as you don't accidentally press them. In Av or TV mode you need a dial to select aperture or shutter speed, and one for ec. Manual you need one for aperture and one for shutter. That's 2. I don't see why you want 4 dials.
> ...



Well its because in my post that you quoted I was making a point about the extra dials. I agree with your point. We want to have direct control but I don't want to see extra controls just for the sake of it. That's a complaint about the Nikon df


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > I prefer the camcorder form factor.
> ...



Not taking sides here, but there's a whole bunch of gear out there to make it easier to hold big video equipment.


----------



## Machaon (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Consider that Canon dSLRs range from the comparatively tiny SL1 to the comparatively large 1D X, with 3-4 intermediate sizes, comprising five current levels of APS-C bodies and three levels of FF bodies.



I've considered the nominal size and weight advantage of MILCs for a while, and concluded that for me body size is not the real advantage.

As you've already noted, Neuro, small bodies are actually harder to use. I actually like the size and ergonomics of the current Canon DSLR bodies.

I can see an advantage, though, in a short flange distance allowing smaller and lighter lenses. It's the variety of lenses being humped around all day that really drive total system encumbrance.

Rather than a range of MILC body sizes, my feeling is that the size & weight competitiveness of the total system will come from packing great IQ and fast apertures into small, light lenses.

Just see what the Leica M system offers in this regard... if only it were affordable and had the EOS architecture!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



I was speaking about positioning the camera on a ballhead.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Machaon said:


> I can see an advantage, though, in a short flange distance allowing smaller and lighter lenses. It's the variety of lenses being humped around all day that really drive total system encumbrance.



How does a 24-70/2.8 or 70-200/2.8 for MILC compare in size and weight to the Canon or Nikon versions?


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



How is that worse for a camcorder design than a SLR design? The lens mounts to the ballhead, and the body (either form) hangs off the back.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



The majority of my dSLR lenses do not take a tripod collar - how do I attach those lenses to a ballhead?


----------



## Mr1Dx (Jan 2, 2016)

It's funny to see what people want from Canon mirrorless. Most of these features and systems are already on the market.

As many already mentioned and I agree, Canon will only bring "good enough" mirrorless systems to market - just good enough for Canon lovers.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> The majority of my dSLR lenses do not take a tripod collar - how do I attach those lenses to a ballhead?



In that case I'm still having a hard time understanding the problem: it's a weight/balance problem, not a problem of wide vs. long sensor-box. Again though, I have no opinion on this, having not spent more than a few minutes using a camcorder.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 2, 2016)

Mr1Dx said:


> It's funny to see what people want from Canon FF mirrorless. Most of these features are already on the market.
> 
> As many already mentioned and I agree, Canon will only bring "good enough" mirrorless systems to market - just good enough for Canon lovers.



Or possibly "good enough" to continue holding the #1 market position.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > The majority of my dSLR lenses do not take a tripod collar - how do I attach those lenses to a ballhead?
> ...



The 'wide sensor box' offers a convenient grip with some leverage, the 'long sensor box' does not. 

There are other ergonomic considerations, as well. I suspect the current dSLR form factor lends itself better to one handed dial/button controls for many settings (during use, camcorders are generally just a start/stop button and a zoom toggle, few presses and few adjustments compared to shooting stills).


----------



## Mr1Dx (Jan 2, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> Mr1Dx said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny to see what people want from Canon FF mirrorless. Most of these features are already on the market.
> ...



I thought the topic is about mirrorless. Since we are talking about mirrorless, can you tell me who #1?

What next, sensor itself? or proper exposure for Canon sensor?


----------



## Quackator (Jan 2, 2016)

Mr1Dx said:


> I thought the topic is about mirrorless. Since we are talking about mirrorless, can you tell me who #1?



None of us have reliable sales numbers.

I have been offered twice to buy into a competitor system at a very 
generous 50% discount price - and turned down twice.

At some point, the EOS M was rumored to be #3 in sales in Japan,
with Canon allegedly holding 9% market share in Japan.
Imagine, with a camera that so many people deem less useful
than a pound of chimpanzee crap.
Looking at my inventory of M & M3 plus lenses, Canon is probably
doing not half as bad as many people think.

Without reliable data, this is pure speculation, of course.


----------



## Mr1Dx (Jan 2, 2016)

Quackator said:


> Mr1Dx said:
> 
> 
> > I thought the topic is about mirrorless. Since we are talking about mirrorless, can you tell me who #1?
> ...



True story....there was an opened unitt of m1 at local camera shop and I got an offer at $125 US by store manager. Almost buy it but then I remembered my latest iPhone can do better for still shots. 

You know why the m does well in Japan? How the m does in other regions?


----------



## Quackator (Jan 2, 2016)

Mr1Dx said:


> (...) Almost buy it but then I remembered my latest iPhone can do better for still shots.



Interesting. How do you manage to change lenses?


----------



## Mr1Dx (Jan 2, 2016)

Quackator said:


> Mr1Dx said:
> 
> 
> > (...) Almost buy it but then I remembered my latest iPhone can do better for still shots.
> ...



Snap photography does not need much lenses. Again, it's good enough to track high speed snail race.

If I really want high quality mirrorless lenses, my batis25/85, fe35 1.4 and fe55 will be the ones. Btw...let's me know how you like your 6400iso 12000iso in low light photography with your crop m sensor. And yet, don't forget to bring a tripod for your crop mirrorless for cleaner images. What a wonderful product!


----------



## scottgoh (Jan 2, 2016)

something comparable to the Sony full frame system and can use the EF lenses.


----------



## lw (Jan 2, 2016)

Many comments here seem to have wandered away from answering the core question - what do you want to see in the *EOS M System*?

If we except that the EOS M system is Canon's APS-C Mirrorless system - and not FF (If Canon did an FF MILC I think it would have a different name and mount - to avoid confusion) - then my wishes for the M4 are straightforward.

Give me everything that a Panasonic GX8 has - but with a 24mp (or higher) APS-C sensor. That sensor could fit easily in that body I would think, given it is larger than the M3.
It has all the bells and whistles anyone could wish for. Controls, Decent AF, decent performance, IBIS (though Canon may never do that in any camera...), large hi-res EVF, 4K, etc, etc. Yet doesn't cost a fortune. 

Anything less than that, and I may as well just buy the GX8... As a Canon user who was an M user but decided to dump the system when the M2 and then the M3 didn't live up to my expectations, I really would like to see the M4 finally 'nailing it'. 
I don't want to buy into another system, but if Canon are going to continue to deliver sub-par MILCs, then I will sacrifice that extra bit of sensor performance for a whole lot better features and functions. (and stick to Canon DSLR when the best IQ is required)


----------



## WorkonSunday (Jan 2, 2016)

i really like my M3, but im also an A7r/A6000/XE1 user. 

i would love to see:

- usb charging
- build-in EVF
- faster AF support using full-size EF lens.
- why they make it so hard to use grey card to set white balance....
- stronger/more well built dial/wheel.
- add an easier-to-assess MF override + magnifying/focus assist button.
- please just copy the sony 16-70mm F4.... it really is an awesome walk-around for tiny aps-c.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 2, 2016)

WorkonSunday said:


> i would love to see:
> - usb charging



Only with better plugs and easier to service faulty connections.
LEMO style plugs would be okay.

I have had faulty plugs on more than half of my cameras over time.
Those small mini connectors for all plugs are a constant source of problems.



WorkonSunday said:


> - why they make it so hard to use grey card to set white balance....


It's actually not different from before: Shoot a picture 
of a grey card and select custom WB on that.
Custom WB is a wise selection for the "my menu"-tab.

The beauty in the Canon solution vs the Nikon solution 
is that you can save hundreds of WB reference files on 
your card if you like, and return to them whenever you 
want, with exactly the same color as last time.


----------



## jd7 (Jan 2, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Until the functional limitations of mirrorless are overcome (particularly in terms of AF, also battery life and ergonomics), I won't consider a MILC as a dSLR replacement. Therefore, the key desire _for me_ is size/portability. I like the size of the M2.
> ...



That pretty much sums up my view as well.


----------



## jd7 (Jan 2, 2016)

Generalized Specialist said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > <p>Sound off in the forum</p>
> ...



I just don't understand the thinking here. If a customer buys a canon camera, or at least an interchange lens one, why would canon care whether that is a dslr or mirrorless? Assuming canon is able to charge a similar mark up, canon is making similar money either way.


----------



## Solar Eagle (Jan 2, 2016)

What is the point of a mirrorless camera if it is the size and price of a 5D and uses the same lenses? Fewer buttons? "Woohoo look at my thinner 5D with no buttons that uses an EF mount adapter instead of a mirror box!!! It's awesome! It even has a small selection of its own FF EF-M lenses which save me one full inch in lens length!!! YES!".


----------



## mb66energy (Jan 2, 2016)

Just what I would like to see is depicted vaguely in the attached image.

I would really really like 3 or 4 wheels to choose settings and one or more small (OLED?) displays which show up the parameter description and the parameter value for those who like direct control over relevant parameters.

Aligning the outer diameter of the mount to the right releases enough space for the bulky grip which doesn't compromise outer dimensions but gives more volume for a larger battery, some "hot" electronics to keep it far from the sensor and better handling of a small body.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 2, 2016)

Solar Eagle said:


> What is the point of a mirrorless camera if it is the size and price of a 5D and uses the same lenses?



Mirrorless will show you the resulting depth of field 
while shooting and still not go dark in the finder.

Mirrorless will show your subject as bright as you 
are going to record it, and not as dark as your 
eyesight really is.

Mirrorless can spread AF fields far better across 
the image than DSLRs can.

Mirrorless doesn't need dark time when the mirror 
flaps up and down.

Mirrorless can give you much higher frame rates 
than a DSLR can.

And more. Size is collateral with most mirrorless
cameras, but since human fingers don't scale down 
along the camera, many people see this rather as
counterproductive.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Quackator said:


> WorkonSunday said:
> 
> 
> > - why they make it so hard to use grey card to set white balance....
> ...



Shoot RAW.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Shoot RAW.



Yada, yada. Raw alone won't help you to achieve exactly the same WB as the day before, 
or the month before, unless you have a reliable neutral reference in the picture.

Holding a grey card a little different from last time might give you a small color shift.
One you might not notice, but a color critical client might.

Having a tried and tested reference image saved will give you extra production safety.
Of course this counts for RAW shooters (who isn't?) just the same.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Quackator said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Shoot RAW.
> ...



That should work, because light never changes. :

Of course, even if your white balance is perfect, your color critical client will notice that other colors are off. If you want to properly manage all colors, not just white, then a custom WB won't help. 

But if saying yada yada and inadequate color management make you happy, by all means keep it up!


----------



## Quackator (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> That should work, because light never changes. :



In some locations it won't.

Maintaining a stock of WB references for locations you might 
revisit again is certainly good practice and will in most situations
deliver very good and consistent results from start.

You are free to use overlord color management on top of that, brainiac.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Quackator said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > That should work, because light never changes. :
> ...



Seriously, it takes the same amount of time to just shoot an appropriate reference (WhiBal, SpiderCube, ColorChecker) as to find your custom WB. That's much better than hoping the light is still the same (most light sources change temperature over time). The only reason for a custom WB in camera is if you're shooting JPG, but in that case you're still better off shooting the reference at the time you're doing the shoot. Unless it's not really that important, in which case the Auto WB is probably good enough anyway, quack.


----------



## Bernard (Jan 2, 2016)

Quackator said:


> Mirrorless will show you the resulting depth of field while shooting and still not go dark in the finder.



Modern screens really don't get that dark. Plus all SLRs have live-view.



Quackator said:


> Mirrorless will show your subject as bright as you are going to record it, and not as dark as your eyesight really is.



Mirrorless and live view-average-out your subject to a medium grey. They are far from realistic when you shoot a high-key or a low-key subject, or anything contrasty, or anything with multiple light sources and/or color temperatures.



Quackator said:


> Mirrorless can spread AF fields far better across the image than DSLRs can.



I don't use AF, so I don't really care about having an AF field in the lower left corner for bragging rights.



Quackator said:


> Mirrorless doesn't need dark time when the mirror flaps up and down.



What's better, a brief black-out that's exactly like a blink (something your eye naturally does 20 times a minute), or a frozen frame? The latter bothers me more, but it's a personal thing.



Quackator said:


> Mirrorless can give you much higher frame rates than a DSLR can.



How high do you need? As far as I am concerned, anything 24fps and above is video, which you can shoot with all DSLRs. Is there a frame rate between the 1dx (12 fps) and 23.997 fps video that is critical to you?


----------



## josephandrews222 (Jan 2, 2016)

Mr1Dx said:


> Quackator said:
> 
> 
> > Mr1Dx said:
> ...



Come again?!


----------



## JMZawodny (Jan 2, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> By the time they did enough to the M to make me interested, it would be an SLR.



Bingo! +10

That is what is wrong with the entire premise of this thread. You post an open question like this and what you get in response is a bunch of replies from folks who basically do not like the premise of an M-series camera. Ultimately they want 1DX2 functionality in a SL1 frame.

I have the original M and have used the new M10. The size is perfect. Bigger is rarely better. Of all of the suggestions made in/by the OP, an integral EVF and some fast primes are the only ones I would want. If that can't do what you need, use a different camera.

For what/who this camera was intended to be used for/by, I think that Canon should not stray too far from the current path.


----------



## infared (Jan 2, 2016)

I would love to see Canon produce a really serious FF mirrorless camera set up like an Olympus EM1 or EM5 II, with multi-functional dual dials on top that you put between your fingers (great set-up). To me the "M" is a non-effort submission to mirrorless photography. So I am asking for a different camera...not an "M".Also, have function buttons (video button as well) that are totally and extremely customizable so that one can set the camera up just the way they want. I would want it to have a new improved FF sensor (~25MP), and handle all my EOS-mount lenses without an adapter of any kind. It could (and would) be a relatively large camera, but that is ok as it would be balancing out with my large lenses. I would like the body to have focus assisting aids in VF like zebra striping etc. an optional global shutter would be a nice added feature. I personally prefer the fluid nature of the way a mirrorless camera handles and LOVE being able to look in the VF and review and enlarge in the VF on site to check focus, composition, etc. (Checking on the rear screen does not compare, for me). I really love mirrorless cameras, and I love my EOS-mount lenses....it would be great to have it all together. I don't dislike my 5DIII. I just think I would prefer working with a killer FF mirrorless body with Canon functionality.


----------



## Bernard (Jan 2, 2016)

Mr1Dx said:


> * Almost buy it but then I remembered my latest iPhone can do better for still shots. *



If the iPhone is all you really need, then there's no shame in that.
People here often assume that everyone needs every feature, and therefore the best camera is the one with the thickest instruction manual.

Obviously that's not the case for 99% of photographers, and the other 1% spend more time discussing features than taking pictures.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

josephandrews222 said:


> Mr1Dx said:
> 
> 
> > True story....there was an opened unitt of m1 at local camera shop and I got an offer at $125 US by store manager.* Almost buy it but then I remembered my latest iPhone can do better for still shots.
> ...


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > I prefer the camcorder form factor.
> ...



No, other way around.

As I said, I've tried it with heavy stuff, specifically a large solid aluminum rod we had lying around at work. It's really comfortable to hold something like that, especially with one hand under the lens just as now, and one under the camera.



> Also, I've put my light little camcorder on a ballhead, it would be a PITA with a heavy load.



It would be the same as now - put the foot under the lens, not the camera.

Turning your wrist at a steep angle because your arm points up but your hand has to point forward is not a particularly comfortable way to hold your hand, and it's hard on the tendon that goes across the outside of your wrist toward your thumb.

Grab your SLR on the grip, point it almost straight up, put your eye to the hotshoe, and imagine the lens came out of the tripod mount. If you want, mount a monopod and make believe that's the lens. That's a very comfortable position to hold heavy stuff.


----------



## George D. (Jan 2, 2016)

Priority no.1 is compact size. Considering size one should consider if Canon intends to launch the equivalent of Nikon Df. A good digital camera housed n the compact body of say an AE-1/AE-1P or the F1N where a "data-back" would be a (fixed) LCD screen. That retro feel and compactness would be appealing to a lot of users. Then the M would have to be smaller than that, with specs just below or on a par. A simplified AF system, say like the 9-point early 5D series, EVF, built-in flash (not necessarily) and an array of not more than 10 lenses (zoom/prime) bright as f/2.8-f/4 to complement a kind of dedicated system.

Price? Set the price of "Df" and you've set the M limit.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 2, 2016)

JMZawodny said:


> Ultimately they want 1DX2 functionality in a SL1 frame.



What's wrong with that? Actually, it would be more accurate to say I want 1DX2 functionality and build quality in a MILC of SL1 size (except for depth) and weight. Please note that the SL1 has an EF lens mount and could easily accept a FF sensor. This isn't without precedent. Read up on the Olympus OM-1 and its design philosophy.

As for accepting the M-system premise, I bought a G7x because the G5X and M3 are too big to fit in my pocket. But I also own a 5D3, 7D and a closetful of L lenses.


----------



## fotoray (Jan 2, 2016)

Make it a little larger for my big hands and include a built-in EV


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 2, 2016)

George D. said:


> Priority no.1 is compact size


Not for everyone. I wouldn't mind having that option, but I'm more interested in the new features (taken from Magic Lantern and high-end video) that can be incorporated into a mirrorless product, even if that means it's the same size as a current SLR.



> one should consider if Canon intends to launch the equivalent of Nikon Df.


It flopped for Nikon, why would Canon even consider it seriously?



> A simplified AF system, say like the 9-point early 5D series


Mirrorless cameras don't use phase-detection AF -- they use contrast-detection (or DPAF).


----------



## Etienne (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Quackator said:
> 
> 
> > WorkonSunday said:
> ...



There's no RAW for video. 

They need to add a Color temperature WB option. In video it's the best way to match different cameras quickly.
Canon has left this out of all three M cameras, So ...

ADD Color Temp WB selection !!!


----------



## josephandrews222 (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> josephandrews222 said:
> 
> 
> > Mr1Dx said:
> ...



...I resemble that remark


----------



## infared (Jan 2, 2016)

Bob Howland said:


> JMZawodny said:
> 
> 
> > Ultimately they want 1DX2 functionality in a SL1 frame.
> ...



Yeah...I posted something similar a few pages back. This would be a totally different camera than the "M" ...granted. If it had an optional grip, and separate battery grip with portrait controls (like the EM5 II) is would be really versatile for a lot of users as you could have small or more substantial according to your needs. It is like Craig says...there are so many different requests here for vastly different cameras...it does make it tough for any manufacturer to design "a" camera. Obviously a tier of mirrorless cameras is more attractive to consumers.
We can dream!


----------



## Wizardly (Jan 2, 2016)

1: Dual dial control. More buttons, less touch-screen.
2: Integrated EVF.
2A: Electronic/optical hybrid system similar to X-Pro 1
3: Incorporate digital split prism simulation along with focus highlighting.
3A: FD to EF-M adapter (basically, Canon buy-in to adapted film lenses). 
4: 27mm pancake or 31 mm pancake (true normal pancake, 50mm equivalent pancake)
5: Optional front grip attached to front of camera via mounting screw (not bottom plate adapters).
5A: Front grip mounting point has electrical contacts. Front grips can have expanded button features, e.g. ISO, WB, etc... buttons.

EOS M will always be a consumer system and so APS-C is fine. 135-format is a fools errand - maintaining 4 lens mounts dilutes a company's focus, if I need a top-tier EF lens I'm not whining about the 1 inch of length difference, and the only reason I'd even want 135 format in a DSLM body anyway is to use adapted film lenses.


----------



## stochasticmotions (Jan 2, 2016)

If canon could match sony A6000 in capabilities with comparable continuous autofocus with canon native (and if possible canon EF lenses) I would definitely get on board. Current rebel sensor capabilities would be sufficient. 

As it is the current A6000 is the best apsc camera I have used but if you gave me those capabilities with the canon ergonomics there would no competing with it (at least until the next big thing). This may be due to the fact that I am so used to canon that it took me months to figure out the how to get the best out of the sony.


----------



## lol (Jan 2, 2016)

The questions should include: what will this mirrorless body offer you, that you can't do (with Canon) today? If it does the same or less, without bringing anything much new, it will struggle. As far as I can tell, all the current M's have bought along is a small-ish size, but not a lot else.

So, for ME, I would like something to equal a 7D2, mirrorless style. So, not the same, but similar in intended uses and functions. The 7D2 is my go to camera, an the only thing stopping me using it more would be the system size. I have ideas on that too.

In no particular order:
1, water resistance. Should keep working in at least continuous moderate rain unprotected (7D original was a bit iffy on that, haven't tested the 7D2 similarly yet).
2, let's have a good resolution EVF, good colour gamut with low display lag and minimal drop outs e.g. only when needed to read off sensor after a shot
3, reasonable battery life: 3 hours active or 1000 shots whichever comes first, minimum (7D2 would easily beat that, but 3 hours is workable with spares. Any shorter will not be fun, definitely no additional battery grips)
4, APS-C sensor. Do some pixel AF magic for better motion tracking (even it only in good light). MPs not terribly important but comparable to 7D2 is fine. Electronic shutter would be a huge plus.
5, small-ish body. Well, noticeably smaller than 7D2 anyway, otherwise why bother? Dual-CF slots would be nice.
6, no flash. It will be poor in this size, so don't waste the space trying to fit it.
7, decent resolution touch screen. No top LCD or anything like that. If necessary, allow the rear screen to be partially powered e.g. leave a part operating to display shooting info, and not light up the whole lot.
8, "enough" buttons on the body. Everyone will have different ideas so just plaster a bunch of custom programmable ones around. 
9, a new class of longer focal length lenses (300mm+). No, I'm not going to try and break the laws of physics again, but we can take a different route to a solution. Take the trick from other mirrorless systems, and don't correct optically what can be corrected easily in software. Only optically correct for those things that software can't deal with. So, don't worry about distortion or lateral CA, but please do still fix spherochromatism for example. Hopefully by not correcting as much, you can still gain good enough (not necessarily best) quality longer lenses with some size weight saving. It would be acceptable, even preferable, to have collapsing lenses to reduce size when not in use, only extending for use. Bring back the push-pull!

Well, that'll do for starters.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> It would be the same as now - put the foot under the lens, not the camera.



Great idea – that should work really well with my 85/1.2L II. 

The current form factor also offers an ergonomically effective grip for a mounted camera, the camcorder style does not. I'm picturing my gimbal-mounted 600/4 with the camcorder style body, tracking a bird from perch up into the sky while holding the camera and pressing the shutter. I think Gilderoy Lockhart's _brachium emendo_ spell would be needed to keep a finger on the shutter button:









Lee Jay said:


> Grab your SLR on the grip, point it almost straight up, put your eye to the hotshoe, and imagine the lens came out of the tripod mount. If you want, mount a monopod and make believe that's the lens. That's a very comfortable position to hold heavy stuff.



Tried it - the 600EX-RT hit me in the head. 

Just holding the camera, it's reasonably comfortable, not too different from normal. The problem is that while having the thumb 'up' is fine with a lightweight camcorder, it rapidly becomes uncomfortable with a heavy rig. Putting the thumb mostly 'under' the camera supports the weight, but the ability to use that thumb to adjust buttons/dials is severely impaired. 

I think the current form factor is here to stay, and that's a good thing.


----------



## Emile Ogier (Jan 2, 2016)

I own the EOS M3 I would really like to see a time lapse function added to the firmware. I do not understand why they omitted to included a cable release socket?

I am enjoying reading all the comments

Emile


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Emile Ogier said:


> I do not understand why they omitted to included a cable release socket?



To save space, probably. Canon's little IR remotes do work with the M, although obviously no time lapse capability.


----------



## rs (Jan 2, 2016)

lol said:


> 9, a new class of longer focal length lenses (300mm+). No, I'm not going to try and break the laws of physics again, but we can take a different route to a solution. Take the trick from other mirrorless systems, and don't correct optically what can be corrected easily in software. Only optically correct for those things that software can't deal with. So, don't worry about distortion or lateral CA, but please do still fix spherochromatism for example. Hopefully by not correcting as much, you can still gain good enough (not necessarily best) quality longer lenses with some size weight saving. It would be acceptable, even preferable, to have collapsing lenses to reduce size when not in use, only extending for use. Bring back the push-pull!



Just bear in mind the upcoming Olympus 300/4 for m43: http://photorumors.com/2016/01/01/olympus-m-zuiko-digital-ed-300mm-f4-is-pro-lens-specs-leaked/

A quarter sized imaging circle and a disregard for correcting as much optically as is possible does not always result in size, weight and cost savings:

Olympus 300/4 for m43 (2016): 93 x 227 mm, 1475 g, 2600 Euro
Canon 300/4 for FF (1997): 90 x 221 mm, 1190 g
Nikon 300/4 PF for FF (2015): 89 x 148 mm, 755 g


----------



## Mr1Dx (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> josephandrews222 said:
> 
> 
> > Mr1Dx said:
> ...



Why take this approach on someone when he/she speaks the truth? Just a friendly reminder, don't forget to bring an external EVF for your M on sunny bright days.


----------



## TAF (Jan 2, 2016)

This discussion brought up another thought regarding EVF's.

Heads Up Displays, of the sort that can attach to eyeglasses or which one can wear, are improving constantly. A removable EVF that was adaptable to a HUD would open up some interesting capabilities.

Imagine discrete photography where you can point the camera around a corner without being seen. I'll bet photojournalists would jump at the opportunity to not get shot in war zones...

While a flip out screen lets you do something similar, the light from the display is obvious at night, so a long cable to an EVF (or a wireless one) would be better...

Maybe that's the killer app that the M needs to really be successful in the market?


----------



## lol (Jan 2, 2016)

rs said:


> A quarter sized imaging circle and a disregard for correcting as much optically as is possible does not always result in size, weight and cost savings:
> 
> Olympus 300/4 for m43 (2016): 93 x 227 mm, 1475 g, 2600 Euro
> Canon 300/4 for FF (1997): 90 x 221 mm, 1190 g
> Nikon 300/4 PF for FF (2015): 89 x 148 mm, 755 g


Actually I was aiming even lower than the Canon 300/4. Any hypothetical lens as I propose probably should cover FF for later system expansion anyway. It may be an awkward position, but what I imagine would be below "L" status, yet have water resistance as a standard feature. I had not considered DO-ing up the lens but my experience with the 70-300 DO left me wanting a bit more, without the price. I suspect Oly are going for the high end, and good luck to them. I'm already L lensed up so I'm not looking to replicate that, but want almost as good, but smaller (when not in use) and lighter. The existing 300mm class lenses in micro4/3 don't quite do it for me in that sense. I had looked...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Mr1Dx said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > josephandrews222 said:
> ...



If you honestly believe your iPhone takes better stills than an EOS M, I apologize for erroneously calling you a troll. Instead of your behavior, the issue is either your ability to judge image quality or your ability to reason. Frankly, trolling seemed the more likely explanation for such a ridiculous comment. 

As for bright sunny days, I apologize in advance if you have a physical disability, but personally I have this thing called a left hand, and on a bright sunny day it casts this thing called a shadow. Astoundingly, the rear LCD is quite easily visible in shadow. But thanks anyway for the reminder of something I don't need.


----------



## asphotographics (Jan 2, 2016)

I bought the EOS M as soon as it became available and the M3 as well. I have all the EF-M lenses and a half dozen EF L and non-L lenses as well (macro, fisheye, long zoom, etc.) Canon was running a deal when I got the M3 where they were giving away a free EF to EF-M adaptor, so that was nice (now I have two to play with). Anyway, I’ve given this topic a lot of thought.

What I like about the current system, and want to see in any future M body:

- small, light, portable (the M3 is definitely easier to hold and operate than the M1 was, especially with EF lenses attached)
good enough image quality for the size — never had any complaints
small, high-quality EF-M lenses with the option to use other EF lenses for specific purposes
tilting touchscreen (fully articulated would be better)
tilting EVF (I do a lot of landscape work and this is great for low angle or even chest-level shooting)
ability to use older FD lenses via a glassless adaptor just for fun
seeing the exact same thing on the EVF and touchscreen
Wifi (getting images off for quick sharing without a computer, and been using Cascable to do timelapses recently)

What I don’t like about the M3:

the EVF contacts in the hotshoe broke support for the GP-E2 GPS receiver (doesn’t even work attached via USB). I geotag everything I shoot outside, but now I have to use tracks from my Garmin watch.
button function assignment is not as flexible as it should be
not all menu items are saved in the Custom shooting mode, making it pretty useless
autofocus while zoomed in always switches the display to a zoomed out view
a lot of other nit-picky things, but I can live with them (no camera is perfect)

I travel a lot and spend a lot of time hiking/skiing or in the back-country on extended trips. I would never carry an SLR body. If weight/space is really an issue I might carry only a G7X, but ideally I carry the M3 with a few EF-M lenses, depending what I expect to encounter. For dedicated shooting days I throw in whatever EF lenses I need as well. I have no problem with the bulk of EF and the adaptor on the M3, but I wish AF performance was a better.

I think the original question could be a bit broader, as I consider the M-system and a full Canon mirrorless strategy to be two different things.

For the M-system I would like to see the following in the next body (which might be a higher end M in addition to the M3 and M10):

built-in EVF, but still with a 90° up-tilt (can sacrifice the built-in flash if necessary, but EVF centred over lens is better for balance)
built-in GPS or support for the GP-E2 (but built-in might kill the battery, so this is optional)
very slightly larger body or at least slightly different back button layout (my palm often hits the menu button accidentally)
vertical grip option with support for two batteries
use the same battery size as M3, please
more pronounced back focus button (I use back button focus about 90% of the time and the one I can assign on the M3 is hard to locate by touch, especially with gloves)
better than 4 frames RAW buffer (unlimited would be ideal)
better than 4 frames per second continuous shooting (7 frames would be better)
way faster autofocus

I think there needs to be a larger sensor mirrorless option in addition to the APS-C bodies. I don’t think the EF-M mount can be used with a 36x24 full-frame sensor (based on my measurements), but it could support an APS-H sensor (1.5x the area of APS-C) which would be acceptable in a body the size of the M3 (not sure the current EF-M lenses project a large enough image circle to cover APS-H though). (Canon actually just announced a 250 megapixel APS-H sensor, so we know they are working on this size.) When Canon introduces a full-frame mirrorless body, it probably won’t be in the M series and it probably won’t have an EF-M mount.

I would still be very interested in a full-frame Canon mirrorless system as a compliment to the compact and portable M-system. The market leader here is obviously the Sony A7 series, so really Canon just needs to be competitive with those bodies. 

Full-frame sensor body wish list:

Take all the advantages of any of the 1Dx or 5D bodies and remove the mirror, use an EVF, and that ought to about do it.
EF-M mount, if possible, otherwise standard EF mount.
If a new mount with a smaller back flange distance than EF and a larger diameter than the EF-M mount is introduced, then it better support EF lenses at full-speed via an adaptor (Canon seems to be going fast and furious on the EF lens upgrade front so I’m not too worried about this one. I would actually be shocked if a third mount was introduced, but the EF mirror box space is such a waste).

Autofocus seems to be the sticking point technology-wise. Getting mirrorless autofocus to be as fast as an SLR, even in low light and with fast moving subjects will be the Holy Grail. Reduce blackout times as well and SLRs will lose almost any advantage. There are times when an optical view-finder has advantages, but for 99% of my shooting, an accurate EVF and Live View are more useable.

Some people ask, why make a mirrorless camera that just replicates the best of what SLRs already do (and have been doing for a long time)? The inverse question is the answer: why, if you could build a digital sensor mirrorless body with all the features of current SLRs (minus OVF) would you bother making a body with a mirror box and all the mechanics, noise, vibration, size, etc., that come with it? DSLRs only have mirrors because film SLRs had them, no other reason. Its time to move on.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Jan 2, 2016)

I'd like Canon to start over. Pasting feathers on a turkey ain't never gonna make it fly like an eagle.
Consider max size about like the AE1, good viewfinder and better lenses are a start. Think about 
two models, one with video and a cheaper one without.


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 2, 2016)

mb66energy said:


> Just what I would like to see is depicted vaguely in the attached image.
> 
> I would really really like 3 or 4 wheels to choose settings and one or more small (OLED?) displays which show up the parameter description and the parameter value for those who like direct control over relevant parameters.
> 
> Aligning the outer diameter of the mount to the right releases enough space for the bulky grip which doesn't compromise outer dimensions but gives more volume for a larger battery, some "hot" electronics to keep it far from the sensor and better handling of a small body.



The only thing I would add is a flippy screen, but even without I would call this design practically perfect.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Seriously, it takes the same amount of time to just shoot an appropriate reference
> (WhiBal, SpiderCube, ColorChecker) as to find your custom WB.



You can take a saved WB preloaded to the location and start right away.

But....... I'm wasting time with your trolling.
You don't want to see my argument, so be it.

EOD in regard to that.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Mr1Dx said:


> It's a long thread and I understand missed quote happens. To me, Iphone is better choice for snap photos here and there without carrying M around.



Apparently you fail to comprehend the difference between 'better' and more convenient. The fact that an iPhone is adequate for snapshots doesn't make it better. However, it's certainly a good choice for convenience when you really don't care much about output quality. I find it quite useful for pics of grocery lists, business cards, and gag pics to send for a laugh then delete. To me, if it's worth capturing and saving, it's worth doing so properly. Obviously not everyone has the same standards. 




Mr1Dx said:


> I too apologize to those with Canon mirrorless mental disability, that think current M is good enough.



And so we're back to...






Clearly, there's no point in further discussion with someone who is both a troll and lacks basic reasoning skills. Have a nice day!


----------



## Machaon (Jan 2, 2016)

mb66energy said:


> Just what I would like to see is depicted vaguely in the attached image.



Nice concept image, Michael.

It looks as though you've drawn an EOS version of the Sony RX1R II...


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 2, 2016)

Etienne said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Quackator said:
> ...



Of course there is. RED does it, Arri does it, and Magic Lantern does it for Canon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Quackator said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously, it takes the same amount of time to just shoot an appropriate reference
> ...



Pulling out a card and pressing the shutter button takes a few seconds. If you're arriving at your location without even a few seconds to spare, you have far more serious problems than a preloaded custom WB can fix. 

The problem with using an old reference is the assumption that the lighting is the same. If there's any outside light, it's not. Even with entirely artificial light, it likely won't be the same. For photomicroscopy, I frequently need to calibrate for accurate white and color balance. Over the years, I've used incandescent, fluorescent, halogen/xenon, LED, and laser light sources. The only ones that don't change output spectrum over time are the laser sources (but LED does change only slightly and slowly). So the assumption that the old reference is still completely accurate is likely flawed, unless it was generated within a few days. Maybe it's not different enough to matter to you, but it is different. Assuming it's 'close enough' is rather sloppy. If you're going to bother applying a custom WB, I'd say do it properly.


----------



## Machaon (Jan 2, 2016)

TAF said:


> While a flip out screen lets you do something similar, the light from the display is obvious at night, so a long cable to an EVF (or a wireless one) would be better...
> 
> Maybe that's the killer app that the M needs to really be successful in the market?



On-camera EVF lag and battery hunger is already a major design challenge for MILCs. Wireless would significantly exacerbate both of those deficiencies.

A wired EVF, not dissimilar to a cabled flash, can't be ergonomic. However, as you say, there may be highly niche applications for voyeurs or unsafe areas.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > It would be the same as now - put the foot under the lens, not the camera.
> ...



I think you're wrong. Turning your right wrist 60 degrees or so the way we do it now on our SLRs is not ergonomic at all. Keeping your wrist straight is ergonomic. It's also way, way stronger.



> Just holding the camera, it's reasonably comfortable, not too different from normal. The problem is that while having the thumb 'up' is fine with a lightweight camcorder, it rapidly becomes uncomfortable with a heavy rig.



Again, wrong. There's a good reason heavy video rigs often look like this:






Look at this image:






See how the wrist is bent?

There's a tendon at the base of the thumb that has a lot of tension in it because of this position and all the compression is on that little corner on the bottom where the wrist is bent sharply. That's not an ergonomic position. The one shown on the Sony above is much more ergonomic and comfortable.


----------



## LDS (Jan 2, 2016)

pwp said:


> Fast forward another decade and it's likely we'll be grateful that we no longer work with clunky DSLR's.



Yes - but the real future are drones that will go out to take photos for you using their own AI.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 2, 2016)

Mr1Dx said:


> Quackator said:
> 
> 
> > Mr1Dx said:
> ...



I'm confused. Didn't you say your iPhone was better than the EOS-M? Well then, how's that iPhone at ISO 6400+? Oh wait, it doesn't go that high, and it would be a lot noisier if it did, as the total sensor area is far smaller. Try to make sense.


----------



## mikewhalen (Jan 2, 2016)

1) A good built-in in EVF is mandatory. It needs to be built-in though, EVF appendages are not acceptable.
2) The AF has to killer fast, with fast start-up time.
3) A relatively small body that doesn't weigh to much. Doesn't have to be pocket-able, but smaller than a DSLR.
4) At least 2 control wheels and 3-4 customizable buttons. 
5) A touch sensitive tilt screen is desirable.
6) APS-C sized sensor is fine for now as long as the IQ is still really good at ISO= 3200.
7) a decent set of lenses that cover 10mm - 200mm, with primes at 24, 35, and 50 to start.
8) a good macro lens.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 2, 2016)

Bernard said:


> Quackator said:
> 
> 
> > Mirrorless can spread AF fields far better across the image than DSLRs can.
> ...



Some of the other points had some merit, but this is just 'I don't need it, so it's worthless'. Wasn't the question, why *in general* would it be better? Most people use AF at least some of the time.


----------



## Machaon (Jan 2, 2016)

asphotographics said:


> ...
> I would actually be shocked if a third mount was introduced, but the EF mirror box space is such a waste).
> 
> ....
> Some people ask, why make a mirrorless camera that just replicates the best of what SLRs already do (and have been doing for a long time)? The inverse question is the answer: why, if you could build a digital sensor mirrorless body with all the features of current SLRs (minus OVF) would you bother making a body with a mirror box and all the mechanics, noise, vibration, size, etc., that come with it? DSLRs only have mirrors because film SLRs had them, no other reason. Its time to move on.



Thanks for your considered comment.

If the EF-M mount's image circle precludes a full frame sensor and, I agree, yet another mount for a FF MILC would be ridiculous as a business case, what are the mirrorless opportunities for the EF mount?

Specifically, if one is stuck with the flange distance of the EF mount but have a mirrorless system, what interesting optical things could be done in the camera box where a mirror once sat?

If one accepts that EOS DSLR is already a great system, could a MILC in the same form factor open up new optical capabilities? We have already seen many people say that body size is not always an advantage, and many will wish to use the same EF lenses irrespective of the mirrorless design.

I am sure there are more imaginative optical engineers out there than me, but some ideas might include integrated features that can be engage or disengaged within the body:

polarised filter (which can not be done in software)
ND filter
tilt-shift (but preserving autofocus)
extender lens
close-up lens (optics allowing MFD reduction / macro for all lenses at the expense of full sensor cover)
a combination of the above in the available volume

Of course, anything new in the optical path can only degrade image quality, is another point of mechanical failure, and many features are best implemented in sensor electronics or software rather than optically.


----------



## KenG (Jan 2, 2016)

I'd like to se a FF Mirrorless that takes EF lenses. I would get one tomorrow. If it doesn't happen soon I will for a Sony


----------



## LDS (Jan 2, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> the Sony above is much more ergonomic and comfortable.



Don't use marketing material. The wrist is straight if and only if the forearm is vertical. Try yourself in which positions your forearm is truly vertical. Look at the Sony picture - with that viewfinder how could someone keep the arm in that position and actually looking into it?

While holding a camera, the forearm is usually slanted forward - thereby the wrist "follows" the forearm if it's also angled somewhat forward, more or less the angle you use on a DLSR.

Controls on the back are also easier to find and act upon than putting everything on top and/or side. There were attempts in the past (i.e. the Rolleiflex 3000 or something alike) to change the form factor of SLR in ways alike you suggest - but no attempt was successful.


----------



## Mr1Dx (Jan 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Mr1Dx said:
> 
> 
> > It's a long thread and I understand missed quote happens. To me, Iphone is better choice for snap photos here and there without carrying M around.
> ...



I think you are changing the course here. Between the Iphone and M, I picked the Iphone as a "better choice" for snap photos. You made good point about iphone is more convenient. 

"To me, if it's worth capturing and saving, it's worth doing so properly. Obviously not everyone has the same standards" ==> I now can see your quality standard. Unfortunately, the M is clearly not my quality standard - from over all performance to IQ.


"Clearly, there's no point in further discussion with someone who is both a troll and lacks basic reasoning skills. Have a nice day!" ==> I haven't seen a Canon troll who owned 1dx(2), 5dIII(x2), 5Dclassic and 600, 200-400, 400f2.8IS II,200f2 and many more in Canon DSLR line. Do you?

My last thing to say to this thread. When you look at what CR readers wish lists for Canon up coming mirrorless, many features are already here. 

Enjoy your weekend


----------



## rs (Jan 2, 2016)

Machaon said:


> Specifically, if one is stuck with the flange distance of the EF mount but have a mirrorless system, what interesting optical things could be done in the camera box where a mirror once sat?



See the DOA Pentax K-01, and the soon to be defunct Sony DSLT range for unimaginative ideas on what's already been done in that space.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 2, 2016)

LDS said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > the Sony above is much more ergonomic and comfortable.
> ...



Only when the camera is at my eye.

My wrist is straight when my SLR is a foot out in front of my stomach.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 2, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



Is that last picture how people hold cameras in use though, or just to show the camera off? When I hold my hand up to my face as though I'm taking a picture, my forearm and wrist are straight as far as I can tell.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 2, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> I think you're wrong. Turning your right wrist 60 degrees or so the way we do it now on our SLRs is not ergonomic at all. Keeping your wrist straight is ergonomic. It's also way, way stronger.



Either way, an eccentric load is being supported, and that means stress on tendons and joints. Frankly, neither way is ideal. 




Lee Jay said:


> > Just holding the camera, it's reasonably comfortable, not too different from normal. The problem is that while having the thumb 'up' is fine with a lightweight camcorder, it rapidly becomes uncomfortable with a heavy rig.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The thumb is under the camcorder – the right position to support the load but a pretty poor place for controls. In fact, there are apparently no controls accessible to the holder's right hand, and given the constraints of the hand positioning, only a very small number of controls would be feasible. The ergonomics of a camcorder are just not suited to frequent settings changes with one hand, while the other hand holds and controls a zoom lens. Start/stop and a power zoom toggle with long stretches of footage vs. a need to adjust multiple exposure parameters between shots. 

Lots of people want a product tailor-made for them. In the mass market, I think your idea is a non-starter.


----------



## Woody (Jan 2, 2016)

The same things I want to see in ALL Canon cameras for 2016: MUCH better sensor (@ both low and high ISO) and MUCH improved on-sensor AF (speed, accuracy and face-tracking capabilities). Canon has fallen way behind the competition in the sensor department (Sony, Panasonic and everyone else on the planet making cameras), it's shocking and highly embarrassing.


----------



## Wizardly (Jan 2, 2016)

TAF said:


> This discussion brought up another thought regarding EVF's.
> 
> Heads Up Displays, of the sort that can attach to eyeglasses or which one can wear, are improving constantly. A removable EVF that was adaptable to a HUD would open up some interesting capabilities.



So kind of like the Zeiss Cinemizer glasses?


----------



## candc (Jan 3, 2016)

Woody said:


> The same things I want to see in ALL Canon cameras for 2016: MUCH better sensor (@ both low and high ISO) and MUCH improved on-sensor AF (speed, accuracy and face-tracking capabilities). Canon has fallen way behind the competition in the sensor department (Sony, Panasonic and everyone else on the planet making cameras), it's shocking and highly embarrassing.



In fairness, canon sensors are not junk. The Sony ones have the edge in some areas but the canons are really good too. The images I have seen from the 5dsr are super sharp with excellent color and contrast. Canon has dpaf and face tracking already. They just haven't rolled it all up into one yet. Rumor is next gen canon will get more dr, that's the only area they are behind in so it should be top notch.


----------



## TAF (Jan 3, 2016)

Machaon said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > While a flip out screen lets you do something similar, the light from the display is obvious at night, so a long cable to an EVF (or a wireless one) would be better...
> ...



It can be ergonomic if it were integrated with one of the modern heads-up style devices.

I wonder how big that niche would be?

In as much as Canon makes a number of products that excel for use in war zones, I would think they might just like to do it just for the bragging advertising opportunity.

Not everything is about sales and bottom line dollars. I would not be surprised if Canon spent more on marketing than they do on R+D - many major corporations do.


----------



## Machaon (Jan 3, 2016)

rs said:


> Machaon said:
> 
> 
> > Specifically, if one is stuck with the flange distance of the EF mount but have a mirrorless system, what interesting optical things could be done in the camera box where a mirror once sat?
> ...



Thanks for the interesting pointers. I agree that they are unimaginative uses of the flange distance: one being "nothing" and the other being "a stationary mirror".

It would be interesting to consider other optical possibilities, provided they offer useful functions and aren't simple gimmicks.


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 3, 2016)

asphotographics said:


> If a new mount with a smaller back flange distance than EF and a larger diameter than the EF-M mount is introduced, then it better support EF lenses at full-speed via an adaptor (Canon seems to be going fast and furious on the EF lens upgrade front so I’m not too worried about this one. I would actually be shocked if a third mount was introduced, but the EF mirror box space is such a waste).



With the mirror gone you can just recess the rear element even farther into the EF mount, similar to EF-S just with no mirror this time. Coming up with a third variant for the same mount probably wouldn't take them more than a few minutes to figure out.

The only thing that a short flange distance really gets you is Pancake lenses, and if you can make those such as that the majority of the lens just sits inside the body then you're no worse off, and you keep 100% backward compatibility.
The only problem I can see is you'll need a new type of rear lens cap, and the size of the rear element on wide angle lenses would be somewhat limited, but the EF mount is already enormous compared to every other Full Frame lens mount out there so it should adapt reasonably well.

What I would like to see from Canon in the future is a lens mount big enough for a 70mm sensor, they're going to need to adapt to larger sensors eventually, given that sensor technology will hit a wall someday, so they may as well get started.


----------



## Machaon (Jan 3, 2016)

TAF said:


> Machaon said:
> 
> 
> > A wired EVF, not dissimilar to a cabled flash, can't be ergonomic. However, as you say, there may be highly niche applications for voyeurs or unsafe areas.
> ...



Yes, I suppose a well-engineered HUD might make the EVF wearable. However, having a camera attached to one's glasses by a cable is never going to be easy to use and move with. At least I wouldn't have any patience for becoming tangled in a cable, accidentally caught in passing objects, or wearing the gear in the first place. Perhaps I am too old school for electronic head gear and cabling.


----------



## candc (Jan 3, 2016)

I would like to see a milc with the sensor close to the back like the film plane of the older slr's. The a7 bodies are about the same depth as an fd camera but the sensor is close to the front. That's why the adaptors are so long. You are going to need an adaptor to use fd or ef lenses but if you can move the sensor back then you can use a much shorter adaptor.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 3, 2016)

Machaon said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > Machaon said:
> ...



Boy howdy. The humble little M sure is evolving quickly ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > I think you're wrong. Turning your right wrist 60 degrees or so the way we do it now on our SLRs is not ergonomic at all. Keeping your wrist straight is ergonomic. It's also way, way stronger.
> ...


----------



## tomsop (Jan 3, 2016)

*Why isn't this item #1???*

The solution requested in the article was not in any of the bullet points so I assume this goes without saying but if they did this one thing I would buy the next model:

FIX THE G#DA#M AUTOFOCUS!!! LIKE YESTERDAY.

How can they release the 70d with DPAF but it never gets put into subsequent Canon Rebels or even the recent 5DS's - I feel like Canon screws with us - they had the tech solution years ago to fix the AF and cannot bother to put it into the EOSM3 after the debacle of the M and the M2? They really treat us like exrement.

All the other wishlist items is just icing on the cake - if I could just have a functioning camera that focuses quicker than a drunk at 3 am then this would be not so embarassing to take out in public and use.


----------



## tomsop (Jan 3, 2016)

I bought into the mirrorless concept because of the price point and the promises that mirrorless technology would translate into better pictures. I wish they would let us know who got fired for making the M or if the people responsible for allowing this onto the market this still work at Canon. How can Canon produce a new camera that focuses more poorly than 5 year older models such as my Rebel Xsi? The image quality is actually not much better than my Rebel xsi and the camera is useless in broad daylight unless you have a way to shade the screen to see anything. I just can't get over how bad the M is and I took the M on vacation and missed too many good shots - so I eventually ditched it and used my iphone. I think the Iphone is much better than the M - not in image quality but in getting the job done of taking shots and video - people make it too complicated a question in the pursuit of art or perfection - I just want to enjoy capturing memories and cannot do it with my M.


----------



## candc (Jan 3, 2016)

the bodies are about the same size but the film/sensor plane is further forward on the sony. move the sensor back, shorten the adapter.


----------



## yorgasor (Jan 3, 2016)

I want a small mirrorless body that I can use for hiking or otherwise going light. In this category, I'm looking at the Fuji X-T1, or possibly the Fuji X-Pro2 when that comes out. My other interest is in a full frame professional grade mirrorless camera. The Sony A7rII is the best currently out, but rumors continue on an even better A9 model coming this year. The current M series doesn't come close to the Fuji models on the small end, and I suspect Canon won't come out with a 1D-M any time soon. If Canon were to put out models to compete in either category, I would be very interested.


----------



## fusionz (Jan 3, 2016)

What Canon should do for mirrorless:

First target the best reasons for mirrorless:

Smaller / Lighter 
NO compromise on picture quality
State of the art EVF (like the new Epson)
Class leading Phase detection
IBIS
Second, why would we want a CANON mirrorless:

Canon professional quality and support
Access to Legacy Lens system - an Adapter with good performance
New Line of Pro Lens - lighter & smaller but world class optics
Compatibility with Canon lighting systems
Range of models for both full frame and apsc
Canon menu system - it works and we are use to it!


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 3, 2016)

fusionz said:


> What Canon should do for mirrorless:
> 
> First target the best reasons for mirrorless:
> 
> ...



How do you do phase detection on mirrorless? Do you mean DPAF?


----------



## jonathan7007 (Jan 3, 2016)

My vote (may have been said up-thread but the vote still needs to be cast) is make that "awesome" model even if high cost. I hope someone from Canon is lurking.....

I have lots of Canon gear for my pro work but carry a Fuji x100T or XE-2 body out the door every day while not "working". The X-Pro2 is not a slam-dunk for me despite my enjoyment of Fuji's offerings so far. As the X-Pro2 approaches I am also considering that fixed-lens Sony RX1RII or whatever replaces the A7IIR (because if I was to use it for professional work it has to have two card slots). Lens choice for everyday street stuff, friends, get-togethers and maybe some added images in an assignment are still limited with the Sony... yes, I know I can adapt my Canon glass, but I don't have "small and trim" lenses that avoid excess attention.

If Canon made their next mirrorless APS-C there would not be very good reason to switch, as the Fuji quality is great at 16Meg now. 24Meg seems to be the 2016 sensor size for upcoming bodies to be released. So full-frame in an M-x will get my very close attention.

So I already added a mirrorless kit and will spend more very soon. I watched carefully, Canon doesn't want to play in this park yet...

I do look forward to reading the rest of the thread.


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> the bodies are about the same size but the film/sensor plane is further forward on the sony. move the sensor back, shorten the adapter.



That might be one of the best arguments that I've ever seen for an SLR with no rear screen.

Not to mention all the cases of backlight bleed, and the extra heat generated within close proximity of the sensor.
At least we can hope they're looking for super thin screen technology.


----------



## candc (Jan 3, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> fusionz said:
> 
> 
> > What Canon should do for mirrorless:
> ...



the a7rii has 399 phase detection af points but i think dpaf could be further improved to match or exceed what sony has done so far.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> the a7rii has 399 phase detection af points but i think dpaf could be further improved to match or exceed what sony has done so far.



DPAF uses every pixel across 80% of the sensor, which far exceeds what Sony has done so far.


----------



## infared (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > fusionz said:
> ...


I am no expert...and am asking a question here. I am a still photographer..never shoot video. So...DPAF is a BIG breakthru for video, right (using STM focus motors)?...but does it give any better results for a still photographer than PDA? I just don't know...hard to find any info out there on that point. So..if I have a camera with 399 phase detection points...and a Canon L lens with a USM....is the focusing any faster or more accurate If I had DPAF for the same set-up for still photography?


----------



## candc (Jan 3, 2016)

i have the 70d and 7dii. those cameras have dpaf and it really works great for live view shooting of odd angle or macro stills. you don't get it in the viewfinder so its uses are limited. sony is using phase detect on the sensor so they are both inherently more accurate than a seperate phase detect module like a dslr uses. the sony camera is faster than the canon dpaf but its not too far off. if canon can improve the speed of dpaf then its a good solution for mirrroless.

the thing thats best about on sensor focusing is its always dead nuts on. even with lenses like the 50l.


----------



## ChristopherMarkPerez (Jan 3, 2016)

I think it should be obvious what the target is for features, size, price. Sony has set a pretty high mark, with Olympus/Panasonic/Fuji not too far behind. Small/light/sharp lenses. Small/light bodies. Fast AF. Adaptable to many lenses from many manufacturers (including AF). 4K video. etc. etc. etc.

However, _if_ Canon ever pulled it's head out of it's nether-regions and offered all the things everyone else already has, the things that might get me to re-consider my already executed move away from Canon FF and APS-C DSLR to Sony mirrorless could include -


Android-based system - with all the menuing functions Canon already has in their VxWorks-based cameras ported to the new OS
Ability to load already available image processing apps (Snapseed, Hipstamatic, etc) into the camera on top of the Android OS
Interfaces (again through already available apps) to social media and image hosting platforms on top of the Android OS

However, should Sony build a more A7RII/A6000-like QX1 (but with fast/high-count cross point AF, fast UI, flexible customizations, leading-edge sensor tech - controlled from iOS, Android, Windows10) there'd be _absolutely_ nothing Canon could do to win me back.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 3, 2016)

One can fear that social media and image hosting platforms will be included in the next iterations of consumer cameras, take a look at the connect station CS 100 - it's all there. Add to that the rumor about "the first ever fully connected camera" ........


----------



## ChristopherMarkPerez (Jan 3, 2016)

*Nail. Head. Hit.*

What was that recent survey of products sold that showed Canon selling into 43+percent of the market?

There's no impetus to change until market changes become too painful to ignore. 

Even now, things may be getting rather painful. Several local camera shops shared anecdotal information recently that indicates Canon and Nikon gear simply is no longer selling. They're saying long gone are the days when 5D MkII could never ever be kept in stock. Now everything just seems to sit on the shelf waiting for a buyer, any buyer.

Sony stuff, OTOH, again according to the anecdotal evidence, is flying off the shelves. By the time the next survey of market share is published, it might already be too late for Canon/Nikon. Instead of asking what the next EOS-M should look like, maybe we'll be asking where Canon and Nikon have gone?



Quackator said:


> One thing: Canon wants to sell cameras.
> As long as they sell more cameras than anybody else at a good profit,
> they couldn't care less if their customers buy DSLR or mirrorless.
> 
> ...


----------



## ChristopherMarkPerez (Jan 3, 2016)

... speaking of cell phones...



Quackator said:


> ... Add to that the rumor about "the first ever fully connected camera" ........


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 3, 2016)

I'd included numerous features from the 5D-III/5Ds/7D-II. I generally like the ergonomics of these bodies so I reckon they are a good place to start.

I was looking at the Bronica RF 645 and thought, hey why not have mirrorless with portrait shooting as the default orientation. I like the longer vertical length of bodies with the battery grip and turning the rear-LCD to vertical would create space at the back for dials and plenty of buttons on the right hand side.

In terms of button placement, I really like the 6D's implementation of playback and zoom buttons. This allows for quick review and chimping for focus. So I like having them not too far from my right thumb.

I don't use the creative functions button very often, but I like the idea of comparison view. However, I'd like to change comparison view to display color vs mono. It's not always easy to visualize how well an image will work in B&W so would be good to have some sort of quick in-field tool, without having to change your picture style to B&W.

I'd like to replace exposure lock [ * ] with an exposure compensation button and include a rear horizontal dial below EC button AF-pt selection button. This dial could be customizable to control EC/ISO/FEC etc... and could also be used to move AF point/array horizontally. The joystick is not my preferred method for changing AF point, so I believe it is good to offer different methods to users.

Due to the placement of other buttons/grouping the best place I could think of for the [Q] button is below the horizontal dial. It is still easy to access with the right thumb.

The menu and info buttons work in conjunction with the set button so having them close together will enable quick menu navigtion with one hand.

I've included a cutomizable wifi button. Perhaps one option would be a wifi-push setting. i.e. When the wifi button is pushed camera will export all rated images with a paired device and on completion wifi will turn off.

I like having the rate and delete buttons adjacent to eachother, and having moved the menu and info buttons next to the set button opens up space for rate and delete on the top left.

Using and integrated battery grip frees up space in the hand grip for two CF-sized memory cards.


----------



## infared (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> i have the 70d and 7dii. those cameras have dpaf and it really works great for live view shooting of odd angle or macro stills. you don't get it in the viewfinder so its uses are limited. sony is using phase detect on the sensor so they are both inherently more accurate than a seperate phase detect module like a dslr uses. the sony camera is faster than the canon dpaf but its not too far off. if canon can improve the speed of dpaf then its a good solution for mirrroless.
> 
> the thing thats best about on sensor focusing is its always dead nuts on. even with lenses like the 50l.



Hey thanks for the quick informative response. Does is make a difference for still photos if it is an STM motor or USM in live view???
I am lumping along with my 5DIII. Still love the camera though...other than the relatively dated sensor...I would say that the lack of a wide-spread of AF points would be the 2nd downside. Especially after using one of my MFT cameras with a much wider spread across the VF...even if they are only CDAF. Once you have a nice wide spread and use it ...anything else seems constricting.


----------



## candc (Jan 3, 2016)

i don't have any stm lenses but i have a couple on the way, 18-55 and 55-250. i will give them a try when they get here.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 3, 2016)

ChristopherMarkPerez said:


> Nail. Head. Hit.
> 
> What was that recent survey of products sold that showed Canon selling into 43+percent of the market?
> 
> ...


----------



## BeenThere (Jan 3, 2016)

What I would want in a Canon M system is a capable compact system camera that is lighter/ smaller than my SLRs for those times when I need small or discreet, but still decent image quality. APS-C sensor size (or similar) would help keep it on the smallish side. The Fujifilm X-T1 has the size and features that would work pretty well. Great lenses and accessories would make this an appealing system for me.

Add
Maybe Canon should buy Fujifilm or get a license to produce X-Mount lenses.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 3, 2016)

Okay, how about this.

A M that's about the size of the G9X with a kit lens that folds flat into the body when not in use, (18-55/3.5-4.5 would be okay) and an ultra compact hyperzoom of range like 15-135/3.5-5.6. My target use it to put it in my wife's purse with the kit lens on it to replace her 1/2.3" sensor hyperzoom.


----------



## LDS (Jan 3, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> Only when the camera is at my eye.
> My wrist is straight when my SLR is a foot out in front of my stomach.



Did you ever asked yourself why the medium format waist level viewfinder never became common on 35mm cameras? Keeping a camera at your waist level not only is slower to use and makes following subjects less easy, but it also mean there's a greater chances more obstacles get in the way while shooting. Not much issues for most users of medium format cameras and their kind of photography, but usually issues for the target of 35mm users.

And after all, usually pro cine gear is carried on shoulders whenever a vest/steadycam (or the like) or tripod is not used. Keeping heavy gear with an extended arm away from the body is tiresome.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 3, 2016)

LDS said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Only when the camera is at my eye.
> ...



Which is why I don't use my SLR, or any other camera, like that. My problem is, the SLR at eye-level is starting to cause me wrist pain in that tendon at the base of your thumb. And the pain is from the angle at which the wrist must be for the camera to be at my eye.


----------



## crashpc (Jan 3, 2016)

If they ever produce such a thing as this m*e*sh-up shows, I stomp on my current Canon gear and bin it...

Anyway Two bodies with nearly same specs except viewfinder could work.
M4, as small as original M, M4 Pro- something like SL1 or T6i.
Both new 24Mpx Full color sensor, 8FPS continous shooting with focuring, small one with 20frames buffer, big one with 32frames buffer (RAW). Big one with larger accu, larger LCD and viewfinder.
That would wake me up. Otherwise cash waiting for next gen, of whatever comes on market.


----------



## ChristopherMarkPerez (Jan 3, 2016)

If Canon really wanted to build a competitive EOS-M, here's their target - head over to Sony Alpha Rumors to see the latest A6100 rumor.

[I have no idea what's going on with this message board, it keeps messing up the link]


----------



## infared (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> i don't have any stm lenses but i have a couple on the way, 18-55 and 55-250. i will give them a try when they get here.


Hey candc...I know that we got off the topic, sort of...but thanks for your input...I learned a lot...Will probably just keep shooting the way I am as I do not have STM lenses and it sounds like DPAF is not going to bring much to the game for me ..and right now (that could change very soon) there are no FF Canon cameras with DPAF anyay (I think) .....but I love the tech and I feel that I know some more now! Great stuff.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 3, 2016)

ChristopherMarkPerez said:


> If Canon really wanted to build a competitive EOS-M, here's their target - head over to Sony Alpha Rumors to see the latest A6100 rumor.
> 
> [I have no idea what's going on with this message board, it keeps messing up the link]



Canon doesn't have to produce the best milc, just one that is competitive. If they can match the Sony A6000 they would be doing fine. A 36MP BSI sensor on a camera that small and that can autofocus would be sick.

This site apparently doesn't want you to reference sony alpha rumors dot com...


----------



## candc (Jan 3, 2016)

brad-man said:


> ChristopherMarkPerez said:
> 
> 
> > If Canon really wanted to build a competitive EOS-M, here's their target - head over to Sony Alpha Rumors to see the latest A6100 rumor.
> ...



interesting excerpt from the article: "One more thing: A source told me the A6xxx replacement camera got delayed twice last year simply because there was no “serious” competition. Sony had it ready for launch but at the end decided to launch it in early 2016 only."

that's funny but true. the a6000 is what 2-3years old and its still the best in its class.

also is news posted there that phase one announced a new mf camera with a 100mp sony sensor, 16bit color, 15 stops dr, $48900.00 price tag


----------



## brad-man (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > ChristopherMarkPerez said:
> ...



Yup. No serious competition. It will be interesting to see whether Canon will choose (assuming they are able) to take part in that segment of the market. I already have bought the complete M "system", but I'm not too old or committed to change. That 6100 really sounds compelling.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> that's funny but true. the a6000 is what 2-3years old and its still the best in its class.



Funny but true like Canon not seeing a need to update the 5DIII or 1D X, which remain best (sellers) in their class despite several updates and new releases from Nikon?


----------



## candc (Jan 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > that's funny but true. the a6000 is what 2-3years old and its still the best in its class.
> ...



true as well. not just best sellers but still best in class as well, at least for the 1dx anyway. i would like to see canon get going on some serious work with milc though. i think they could do an even better job than whats out there if they would get their ass in gear.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > candc said:
> ...



I agree that they _could_, and probably they will...once it looks like a profitable market segment for them. Their patent activity shows them actively engaged in R&D in that area, and I consider the M line as basically a marketing experiment. The relative popularity* of the line shows the experiment was successful, so they'll bide their time until the market is ready for a serious commitment. 

* BCN data (sales in Japan) showed the original M as the #2 best selling MILC the year it was launched; BCN rankings for 2014 showed that Canon was 4th in market share, nearly tied with Panasonic and gaining, while market segment-leader Sony lost ~10% over the year. That's with Canon having just a single MILC line and a few lenses compared to multiple lines and many more lenses from the other MILC manufacturers.


----------



## Dustspeck (Jan 3, 2016)

Like others have noted, prime lenses are sorely needed. My EF 85mm f/1.8 with the Canon adapter is incredibly sharp on the EOS M3. Also, I love shooting with my old Minolta MC Rokkor 58mm f/1.4 and cheap adapter in full manual mode, relying on the great focus peaking. But what I'd really like is an M-mount 60mm f/1.4 with I.S. and a complimentary 10mm f/1.4 with I.S. as well. Strangely, the kit EF-M 18-55mm seems to produce much better results on my older EOS M bodies but seems soft on the M3, while my EF-M 11-22 works great on either version.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> that's funny but true. the a6000 is what 2-3years old and its still the best in its class.



Really?

I tried one in the store. It has one of the worst viewfinders and the absolutely worst ergonomics of any camera I've ever tried. If someone gave me one I'd use to to wedge my door open. What a steaming heap of...


----------



## crashpc (Jan 3, 2016)

neuro I don´t see it like that. How successful is it, when it needs to go total firesale to get sold, and second iteration doesn´t even get into USA?
I don´t buy that blaf that americans like bigger things. I have my M, and I like, but it is very inferior in about everything but size and lens sharpness. How can Canon test market for good advanced mirrorless, when they try us with this wretch?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 3, 2016)

crashpc said:


> neuro I don´t see it like that. How successful is it, when it needs to go total firesale to get sold, and second iteration doesn´t even get into USA?
> I don´t buy that blaf that americans like bigger things. I have my M, and I like, but it is very inferior in about everything but size and lens sharpness. How can Canon test market for good advanced mirrorless, when they try us with this wretch?



Looking at the global demographics of MILC shipments (CIPA data) might help clear things up.


----------



## ChristopherMarkPerez (Jan 3, 2016)

When I look at my Canon FF DSLR files (all CR2) and compare them in similar shooting situations to my Sony A6000 files (all ARW) there really is no competition. The Sony files contain more dynamic range, MUCH cleaner shadows, and have visibly superior resolution. I don't know how they do it. That sensor is only APS-C in the A6000. 

If my clients are happier with my work now than before (and they _are_), then I'm happier, too.

I wish Canon all the best as they try to catch up. Strange times, these.




candc said:


> ...interesting excerpt from the article: "One more thing: A source told me the A6xxx replacement camera got delayed twice last year simply because there was no “serious” competition. Sony had it ready for launch but at the end decided to launch it in early 2016 only."
> 
> that's funny but true. *the a6000 is what 2-3years old and its still the best in its class.*...


----------



## dpetryk (Jan 3, 2016)

There are a few things that are must to sell a camera like this I think. 
1 it needs to stay resonably small so there if benifit over a dslr
2 needs some nice lenses. which also can't be to big or it reduces the benifit or a smaller mirror less system

3 most importantly to me is fast accurate AF on the level of Olympus and Sony systems and if it works well with a EF lens adapter as well then it would be a huge hit I think for sure. If the current M had that I wouldn't have just bought another Olympus..I think most canon dslr shoots would prefer to be able to have all canon system right through a mirrorless.

thanks what I think anyways


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 3, 2016)

ChristopherMarkPerez said:


> When I look at my Canon FF DSLR files (all CR2) and compare them in similar shooting situations to my Sony A6000 files (all ARW) there really is no competition. The Sony files contain more dynamic range, MUCH cleaner shadows, and have *visibly superior resolution*. I don't know how they do it. That sensor is only APS-C in the A6000.
> 
> If my clients are happier with my work now than before (and they _are_), then I'm happier, too.
> 
> ...


Which Canon FF DSLR bodies are/were you using? 

Sony has better dynamic range this is a fact, saying that they have much cleaner shadows is just repeating the same point.

"Visibly superior resolution" depends very much on what lenses are used on either body. Generally full frame lenses resolve more on full frame than on APS-C. Very good APS-C lenses approach the performance of good full frame lenses, but I have a strong measure of skepticism towards claims that 24MP APS-C (with unspecified lens attached) out-resolves some unspecified full frame bodies (with unspecified lens attached).


----------



## scyrene (Jan 3, 2016)

candc said:


> the bodies are about the same size but the film/sensor plane is further forward on the sony. move the sensor back, shorten the adapter.



Um, isn't there a whole load of electronics in the digital camera? Like circuit boards and heat sinks? It has to go somewhere - it can't go in front of the sensor, so it goes behind. Also there's the LCD.


----------



## candc (Jan 4, 2016)

scyrene said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > the bodies are about the same size but the film/sensor plane is further forward on the sony. move the sensor back, shorten the adapter.
> ...



Yes but the sensor is closer to the back on a canon dslr as well. Its about 1/2" from the sensor plane to the back of the LCD on the 7dii. Its a full 1" on the a7rii. If it was the same 1/2" the adaptors would be 1/4"long instead of 3/4". That would be a better setup imho.

Edit, the fd to e would be 1/4 vs 3/4, the metabones ef to e would be 1/2 vs 1". If they make it a design priority I am sure it can get moved back further. I am typing this on a surface pro 3.


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 4, 2016)

http://camerasize.com/compare/#624,448

Ok, new plan.
Just make a full frame mirrorless SL1.

Apparently the SL1 is actually the smallest they can make the mirror mechanism for a crop body, full frame probably wouldn't fit.
But if you just take out the mirror then you have something that's practically the same size as the A7RII. Especially if you can recess a lens more than half an inch inside the mount (EF-S already cuts 8mm off the flange distance).

EF-M is still great for an ultra compact system camera, but for enthusiasts, which is pretty much the only market full frame will ever have, the standard EF mount is not prohibitive.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 4, 2016)

Recessing the lens *into* the mount will make mounting/unmounting 
much more cumbersome, and it will kill the possibility to adapt EF
lenses with a tilt/shift adapter.

Reduce flange distance - absolutely yes.
Make it a small girls camera - absolutely no.
The Sony is already too small for many, and get's a good 
portion of it's critique exactly for the handling, which is in 
wide parts size (or lack of size) related.

The difference in flange distance has potential. Don't waste that.

We have all seen that better optical performance requires
a certain physical size, as seen in the Zeiss Otus and Sigma 
Art series lenses amongst the most prominent.

Putting a "rear lens cap" camera onto that gives you
poorly balanced systems. Don't make it too small.


----------



## DigiAngel (Jan 4, 2016)

Give me a 2500€ fullframe mirrorless, with fast, sure-footed auto-focus, EFx-Mount, EVF and decent size (somewhere between a dslr pro body and a sony A7) and please, make it as nice looking as Fuji does.

For the EFx-Mount, release a compact standard zoom and some small, light and affordable f2.8 primes. That would be the go-to setup. And when i want to use my fast expensive L glass, i just throw in on there with the included adapter.

hell...even make it 3000€ if you have to, bust just MAKE it at last...


----------



## dulso (Jan 4, 2016)

What I want to see is more native lenses at the least a 35mm f1.2 image stabilised and a 50mm 1.4 image stabilised lens also a 15mm to 35mm f2.8 or a 15mm to 85mm f4 both image stabilised. But I can't see it happening because this would cut into the more profitable top end lens territory and would hit sales of these lenses.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 4, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>What we want to see in an EOS M camera:</p>
> <ul>
> <li>A larger camera with better ergonomics</li>
> <li>Minimize the number of buttons, some of us have big hands</li>
> ...



I'm sorry - who the blazes is this "we"?

the only reason mirrorless really works is the size of it. I fail to see why they should make it bigger, when they can actually make DSLR's smaller, however choose not to for ergonomics.

full frame? really? it's a dead end even as far as sony sales. why on earth would canon do this? Sony sales in japan. down. A7 sales in NA .. what sales? they like most mirrorless have dropped off the map.

the M/ M2 were nice, small, well built and did their job well. unlike some, even my IR modified M never had a problem in bright sunlight (did you reprogram your garbage can button?)

the lenses are nice, light and small.

Adding to that as far as lenses? of course. 

fixing the bastardized firmware in the M3? yes please.

making the M into a larger more expensive system aka full frame? no thank you.

built in EVF? why? the articulating EVF that you can get with the M3 is amazing. only the GX7/8 can do the same.

the M3 is actually a step backward for a minimist setup that can easily fit in a multiple sets of small bags. I could put two M's easily side by side and they take up very little room.

also with full frame - there's alot of sensor stuff that canon has to figure out before they even attempt a full frame mirrorless, the APS-C sensor used in the M3 has a pretty dramatic corner issues with UWA lenses, and even shows green cast into the corners with EF-M lenses - and now you want them to do full frame? mm okay.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 4, 2016)

dulso said:


> What I want to see is more native lenses at the least a 35mm f1.2 image stabilised and a 50mm 1.4 image stabilised lens also a 15mm to 35mm f2.8 or a 15mm to 85mm f4 both image stabilised. But I can't see it happening because this would cut into the more profitable top end lens territory and would hit sales of these lenses.



ummm sure. why not ask for a purple unicorn to hand deliver them to you as well?

what you are asking for IS top end lenses, do you think canon's going to make those and the 5-7 years of R&D it takes to take a lens from conception to production and sell it at a loss for $399?


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 4, 2016)

crashpc said:


> neuro I don´t see it like that. How successful is it, when it needs to go total firesale to get sold, and second iteration doesn´t even get into USA?



people keep bringing this up.

ALL MILC's get discounted to sell. Olympus has been selling boatloads of E-PL6 kits for 65% off in japan for the entire freaking year.

Japan is very price / sale conscious. which is probably why canon made the M10.

and btw, who the heck thinks that USA is a factor as far a mirrorless anyways?


----------



## archiea (Jan 5, 2016)

14 pages! not so bad for such a "failed" system... 

pretty amazing how polarizing the M line has been for canon. 

As far as what I want for the M4 or future M's?

In short: the fuji xt-1. 

Spwcifically:

1) Form factor: I love the current M3 form factor: nice balance of size and grip. Ergonomics is one of canon's strengths

2) button layout. Currently the m3's button layout is optimized for LCD viewing not evf viewing Meaning when one is viewing thru the evf, they have to almost relive their grip of the camera to reach buttons like the magnify button. They also have to switch to LCD to change the position of the AF area if they aren't in face tracking mode. This seems easy enough as a firmware fix int he current M3, i.e. if in evf mode, then the D pad becomes the focus point selector/mover. 

Also, make the current MFN button be programable to both engage the magnify if in manual focus or be the AF button if in Auto Focus AND the AF button set to be not engaged with he shutter. Having it be programable next to the shutter is great use of the limited real estate and allows for the ability to focus and recompose (I know, bad habit) without having to move your thumb, which can affect the stability of the camera. 

Also, please return the quick menu display selection to the Q button instead dog it being a cycle option with the info button. this disrupts the shoot by requiring the photographer to return their attention to which of the three display options they had up. 



3) speed: even with Manual focus, there seems to be a slight delay when the shutter is depressed and engaged. so for street photography or anything where the subject is moving, if you managed to track the focus manually, the shutter seems delayed when pressed. This is perhaps the biggest contributor to the perception that the AF is slow in that the camera's reaction time to shutter input is slow as well. 

4) smarts. What does this mean? smart functionality in that when someone engages the lens's manual focus, the camera engages the magnify automatically. Smart like the above mentioned that when the evf is on, the D-pad serves as the button to adjust the focus region. Also lost apparently si that when magnified, when one half presses not he shutter, the image remains zoomed. Most other canon's (and cameras in general) assumes that if you half press the shutter, you are ready to take a photo, so it returns to the viewfinder display. Also the ability to take RAW's and run an image process onto a jpg stream should be possible. 

5) return the menu to more of an EOS menu and less of a powershot menu. I.e. multiple color spaces, programable Kelvin for white balance, Also lens corrections like the 5D for jpps (it is a wifi camera after all and who wound't want profiled lens corrections in the jpgs

6) specifically: the focus peak assist should have a higher clip mode. currently the focus peaking has to broad a soft clip to make precise focusing more difficult. 

7) HDMI clean out, headset out. 

8) electronic shutter release ability to take fast strobe exposures, i.e. F1.4 images in full daylight. 

9) pro ef-m lenses instead of an ef-s clone of lenses. I understand this will not happen since they consider the EF lens compatibility to be the solution.. However one shouldn't sacrifice the portability of the system just to take an f1.2 or f1.4 prime shot. 


Well thats all I can think. thanks for sharing!


----------



## piggee (Jan 5, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> <li>Find some way to make EF lenses work like they do on a DSLR, this is the hard one.</li>



I will be ok with the FD mount for the M system and EF for EOS. Old lenses on this? It will be really great and is there new space to make and sell lot of new lenses.


----------



## bf (Jan 6, 2016)

If M line wants to go for perfection, I can imagine of two directions that are Leica and Sony a7. I'd like to see the Leica direction. In other words, Fuji's approach with full frame sensor. Nice native wide primes. A modern body for retro style photography. Urban, street, fashion, and family may be the attractive genres I can think of.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jan 6, 2016)

I'm currently own a7rii and a7s, I just don't see myself buy another crop mirrorless system. 

The AF tracking on A7rii is truly amazing as a mirrorless. At this point, I will not wait for Canon to release decent ff mirrorless anymore. I do look forward to see what Canon has to offer in near future though. Will I buy Canon ff mirrless? well, it will depend on how it performs.


----------



## Ivan Muller (Jan 6, 2016)

Having had my M3 for the past 6 months or so I would like the following to be improved/implemented:

1. Much smaller AF points

2. Joystick to move AF points around whilst using the evf

3. Slightly bigger body to accommodate a bigger battery - perhaps in the grip.

4. 6/8 frames per second.

5. Faster AF and lock on plus subject tracking

6. Much better face recognition or even eye recognition

7. Implement a 'zone focus' system ala Leica X1/2

8.24mp is nice but I would rather have cleaner high iso images above 1600iso...so will be happy with the 20mp sensor from the 7d2, which will also probably speed up AF etc..

9. Absolutely the exact same interface, menu & buttons etc as the pro dslr's

10. Built in radio flash trigger or optical trigger rather than using the build in flash


----------



## Andyx01 (Jan 6, 2016)

1. larger camera? Heck no, make it smaller if possible. Get an SL1 if you want something larger.
2. Minimize buttons? Another big No. Camera needs more, and higher quality ones, similar to the DSLR controls.
3. Built-in EVF? No way to the EVF. Wireless display yes, headset accessory, sure, integrated EVF, yuck. Again get an SL1 if that's what you like, or purchase the accessory.
4. Full Frame? What about Medium Format? I think they need to stick with APS-C until it's more accepted. No sense digging a bigger hole.
5. Dual Pixel AF can already do this can it not?
6. More lenses, sure...

In summary, the camera should be small, thin, and robust, built like a pro series DSLR.
Do away with the cheap buttons, and focus on quality. Solid jog dial, customizable buttons that provide feedback.
Phone App with wireless display, and data bridge. Think TriggerTrap but with so much more. See what you shooting on your phone in live-view. (great for remote applications.) Hold the camera under-water, but see what your getting on your phone screen, (or headwear) etc...
Attach it to a drone, and use it as a live-view.
Open up flexibility for pro's, so they all want one. Don't just dumb down a DSLR into a chunky over-optioned pile of an existing product from 5 years ago.
Seriously, is it that hard to innovate?


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 6, 2016)

+1 on everything, except i want a built-in top-notch 4k EVF.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 7, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> +1 on everything, except i want a built-in top-notch 4k EVF.



You can't have your built in 4k EVF and #1 on his list without Timelord technology


----------



## tcmatthews (Jan 7, 2016)

The EOS M3 was a step in the right direction but two years late. They need to release a camera that is comparable to the next Sony A6xxx. We will likely get a camera that is a poor substitute to the current A6000. I am more interested in the rumored Sony A6100. Especially if has as good of auto focus with 3rd party adapted lenses as the A7II and A7rII. 

According to Sony Rumors unconfirmed Rumored specs for A6100

36mp BSI sensor
silent electronic shutter mode
IBIS
4K recording
Touchscreen

I have not decided if I am just going to ditch the EOS M or not. I will take that up when my EOS M dies. I do like the 22/2 stm. 

As for a compact mirrorless camera I think m4/3 is getting close to being a better option.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 7, 2016)

tcmatthews said:


> The EOS M3 was a step in the right direction but two years late. They need to release a camera that is comparable to the next Sony A6xxx. We will likely get a camera that is a poor substitute to the current A6000. I am more interested in the rumored Sony A6100. Especially if has as good of auto focus with 3rd party adapted lenses as the A7II and A7rII.
> 
> According to Sony Rumors unconfirmed Rumored specs for A6100
> 
> ...



Yup. The A6100 sounds like the camera that will make it worthwhile to bribe the guys over at magic lantern to write some code to allow the use of my Speedlites with a Sony. And with any luck, Sigma will make lenses for it.


----------



## candc (Jan 7, 2016)

brad-man said:


> tcmatthews said:
> 
> 
> > The EOS M3 was a step in the right direction but two years late. They need to release a camera that is comparable to the next Sony A6xxx. We will likely get a camera that is a poor substitute to the current A6000. I am more interested in the rumored Sony A6100. Especially if has as good of auto focus with 3rd party adapted lenses as the A7II and A7rII.
> ...



I haven't done too much experimenting but I know the canon speedlights mount and fire on Sony bodies. Here is an article that explains some workarounds to get the exposure correct. 

http://timfordphoto.com/using-canon-speedlite-flash-sony-a7/


----------



## brad-man (Jan 7, 2016)

candc said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > tcmatthews said:
> ...



Thanks for that link. That's interesting, but I want my RTs to have full functionality. It's no less likely to happen than some of the other requests in this thread.


----------



## Xyclopx (Jan 7, 2016)

i know there's 15 pages previous to this, but anyway, my opinion:

i love the idea behind the Leica SL but not the price. i don't care about size. i don't care about weight. i only care about ultimate performance and the technical advantages offered by a mirror-less design.

i would buy the sony a7 series as it's great in most respects, except that it's sony and i'd rather keep with canon cause they have a better, more well-thought out product line.

if canon makes a mirror-less with similar or better IQ to my 5d's and with all the techie bells and whistles of newer cameras i'll buy it. but otherwise hell no.

the mirror is a dinosaur and offers no inherit advantages that can't be overcome with technology. wish canon would just go all in and do it.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 7, 2016)

Xyclopx said:


> the mirror is a dinosaur and offers no inherit advantages that can't be overcome with technology.



What technology will give EVFs truly zero lag, exactly zero power usage, infinite dynamic range and infinite color gamut?

The problem with EVFs is that they have so many inherent disadvantages that cannot be overcome with technology.


----------



## Xyclopx (Jan 7, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> Xyclopx said:
> 
> 
> > the mirror is a dinosaur and offers no inherit advantages that can't be overcome with technology.
> ...


1. truly zero lag--well technically there is no such thing, but i'm 100% sure someday this lag would be imperceptible. remember, even what you see is an electrical impulse and processed by your brain.

2. power usage? well, i guess an evf would always use more energy. but seriously... so what? that's why we have replaceable batteries.

3. infinite dynamic range.... have you ever tried staring at the sun with your bare eyes? not recommended. how 'bout trying to compose in near darkness?--pretty hard right? this is the strength of the evf, to let you see more usefully.

4. infinite color gamut.... alright, i guess technically there's no such digitization to be exactly infinite as that's the very definition of "digitization". but again seriously?--you really need that last 0.0000001% when taking pictures? like what are you going to do?--oh that light is 0.00001% too yellow, let me tweak that dial with my nano-adjuster?  anyway, yes, someday the evf will be so good no human eye can differentiate between colors. that's also for sure. ............ but what i can see is.... hmmm, how does this scene look if i change the white balance a bit? well, would you look at that!....


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 7, 2016)

Xyclopx said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Xyclopx said:
> ...



That lag is added to the lag in the camera. I need the lag in the camera to be zero. I'd tolerate 2ms. That would require 1/1000th shutter speed, zero readout speed and 1000fps with zero pipeline lag. Okay, that's not really doable so, maybe 1/2000 and 2000fps with 0.5ms of pipeline lag and 0.5ms of readout time.

I need it to be that in all lighting conditions.



> 2. power usage? well, i guess an evf would always use more energy. but seriously... so what? that's why we have replaceable batteries.



I don't want to have to carry 5-10 extra batteries.



> 3. infinite dynamic range.... have you ever tried staring at the sun with your bare eyes?



Well, sort of. But during a partial eclipse and with a camera at f/16 with 3 stops of ND.



> not recommended. how 'bout trying to compose in near darkness?--pretty hard right?



Quite easy, actually. I do it all the time. I've never had a scene I could shoot but that I couldn't see, including 30 second exposures.



> this is the strength of the evf, to let you see more usefully.



That's a weakness - it's slow and extra laggy, and it ruins your eyes' dark adaptation.



> 4. infinite color gamut.... alright, i guess technically there's no such digitization to be exactly infinite as that's the very definition of "digitization". but again seriously?--you really need that last 0.0000001% when taking pictures?



EVFs are often not even SRGB, so they distort colors quite a bit. Camera sensors are often wider than ProPhotoRGB which is way, way, way bigger.


----------



## smozes (Jan 11, 2016)

I just want the next M to be fast and have them fix all the idiotic bugs in the M3's firmware. I don't understand how the M3 and the latest Powershots with Digic 6 in them, still feel slow.


----------



## crashpc (Jan 13, 2016)

Waiting for truly new sensor. Not thrown bone with few more pixels, cheating with added contrast, and pathetic AF and burst speed without focus. Full color 24 Mpx or awesome 32-64 Mpx, usable bursts of about 6 FPS with continuous AF and 8 without AF.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 13, 2016)

crashpc said:


> Waiting for truly new sensor. Not thrown bone with few more pixels, cheating with added contrast, and pathetic AF and burst speed without focus. Full color 24 Mpx or awesome 32-64 Mpx, usable bursts of about 6 FPS with continuous AF and 8 without AF.



Actually the M3's sensor is quite good by Canon's standards. What you should be waiting for is the rumored Sony A6100 or 7000 or whatever they're going to call it. If the rumors have any truth to them it's going to be a ridiculous little machine. Then all you'll have to worry about is lenses and flashes and hope you never need service...


----------



## crashpc (Jan 14, 2016)

That´s the problem. Jump with all lenses. That is ridiculous. That´s why I´m waiting for Canon.
There is Nothing as good for Sony, that I could get for that price range, from 10 to 250mm.
EF-M 11-22mm (it can go closer to 10mm), 22mm f/2,0, second hand best and sharpest copy of 50mm f/1,4, and mint 55-250mm IS STM (This one for $185. Keep in mind, european prices). The glass was closer to being free than paying big $$$$ for Sony.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 16, 2016)

crashpc said:


> Waiting for truly new sensor. Not thrown bone with few more pixels, cheating with added contrast



not sure what you are complaining about here.

"added contrast" you mean adobe's profiles?

i've never heard of a complaint on the M3's sensor in this regard.

the ONLY issue with the M3 sensor is that it was designed for a DSLR, and not MILC with a short registration distance, so it has corner issues.

otherwise, there's certainly more latitude and better noise handling from that of the 18mp M/M2 sensor.


----------



## crashpc (Jan 17, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > Waiting for truly new sensor. Not thrown bone with few more pixels, cheating with added contrast
> ...


Me neither, but in some cases, it seems that even JPEGs are slightly more contrasty, right out of the camera. And yes, Adobe profile is waay too much overcooked compared to DLSR profiles. Canon 5DS goes the same way and I don´t like it.
Then add mentioned corner problems, and that´s it - I´m not going to buy new device for full price if it brings some shortcomings to me. I´skipped, waiting for next iteration...

If I process M image and M3 image to taste, M3 doesn´t run anywhere, so it´s not worth the money (regarding sensor) for me. I know I´m not average joe and the device is not intended just for me, but if Canon wants me to buy more gear, they need to do something better. Sony like or Nikon like


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 21, 2016)

thetechhimself said:


> Canon's M4 is like bringing a knife to a gun fight. If Canon can't deliver the following, they need to fold on mirrorless and let the big dogs handle business *little dogs fight over the scraps of the ILC business*, because, it's not them right now...



Fixed that for ya.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 21, 2016)

thetechhimself said:


> ILC is growing though.



Nope – ILC sales are falling. You likely meant MILC, but those sales are basically flat, 1-2% growth over the past three years. 

Because of the drop in dSLR sales, MILCs have gone from 20% to 25% of the ILC market over the past few years, but despite anyone who will tell you otherwise, MILC is not a growing market. Even with Canon's limited investment in that market (one body line and a handful of lenses), they have around 10% market share. When/if the MILC market actually starts growing, I suspect Canon can rapidly expand their portfolio...but with the current state of the market, they're mostly sitting out for now.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 21, 2016)

Lee Jay said:


> Xyclopx said:
> 
> 
> > the mirror is a dinosaur and offers no inherit advantages that can't be overcome with technology.
> ...



I agree. I like the idea of an EVF for really one big reason today. It allows a mirrorless, small form factor camera. 

In a debate with a buddy, he once said to me (after naming all the things an EVF brings to the table), "You know, an OVF is really only good for one thing, composition." I actually laughed out loud. I responded to him with something like, "You realize, composition, aka what you are actually taking a picture of, is only the most important aspect of the shot." 

So I look at it as for all the tech promised with an EVF, "what you see is what you get", instant histograms, focus peaking, etc. I still use it just like an OVF, for composition of the photo. Most that other stuff, while it may give an initial "cool factor" is more gimicky then anything. 

And everything improves, and with time (better technology) maybe I'll find some of those features useful. But as it stands now, the colors never look right in any EVF I've used. The screen blackout time is much longer then the time it takes the mirror to slap up and back down. And exposure? Even when I'm shooting manual, I'm still usually in Auto ISO so the camera is doing the metering/exposure anyhow. And similar to the color issue, the brightness of the EVF is never representative to what I see on my calibrated display. And for the times I'm shooting full manual with a select ISO, that's often external strobe work so a "realtime" exposure is useless anyway. And I don't have to repeat the lag issue, battery consumption etc. that we all know exist with the EVF.

Nope, everyone is different, but for me an EVF and OVF still do the same thing, let me compose the shot. The EVF's useful contribution as I started out with, is to make a smaller camera when I don't feel like going "all pro" and hauling around the DSLR and large lenses.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 21, 2016)

The next M system, a pro level system should be:


physical form factor size a bit bigger, like a fuji X-T1
Maintain EF-M mount, APS-C sensor
Integrated EVF
DPAF
With this bigger form factor, implement controls, ergonomics of a xxD or xD line. Put a control dial on top just behind the shutter button. A rotating dial on the back. Put the 3 (5D/7D style) or 4 buttons (70D/6D) on top for doing ISO, drive modes, etc. Put a little joystick (5D/7D) for selecting focus points. And of course a dedicated AF button for BBF.

I've said many times that I think APS-C is the sweet spot for mirrorless to gain that advantage of a more compact kit. So I think EF-M is where Canon should continue for now. Save a FF mirrorless for another day. Go for a bit more pro style camera, aka make it a little bigger. And we all love the button/ergo of current DSLR from Canon. Why not implement similar control layout on their next M? The original M was just so stripped down in this regard.


----------



## crashpc (Jan 21, 2016)

I hope for truly advanced EOS M-3 like body. Better everything. Thy can do that.

Now some food for thought.
210-950mm APS-C setup:





Almost "in palm of your hand". Yes, the final outcome is pretty dim, but sharpness and IQ wise, it can bravely stand against most compact superzooms, and the equivalent aperture is still better than those compact superzooms.


----------



## brad-man (Jan 21, 2016)

Well I guess it's just me then. I can deal with the limitations of the M3. While I would welcome improved FR and AF capabilities and a few tweaks to the interface, I really just want some fast glass. One UWA prime @f/2.2 or faster and a medium tele @f/2.5 and finally an 75-80mm @ f/2.8, I would find the M suitable for many more uses and be a happy camper. Just drop a lens in each pocket and I'm off. In-camera RT control would also be nice, since the EVF hogs the hot shoe. Sometimes it's good to dream...


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Jan 21, 2016)

discontinue the line too have more resources and assembly lines for real cameras like the 1D and 5D xxD lines


----------



## tcmatthews (Jan 22, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> The next M system, a pro level system should be:
> 
> 
> physical form factor size a bit bigger, like a fuji X-T1
> ...



While I like the direction you think Canon should take I feel it is nothing but wishful thinking. Fuji seams to share your enthusiasm why don't you buy one. They see APSc as a viable niche market. They also think Sony is more interested in full frame E mount cameras than selling compact high quality compact crop cameras. Nikon seems to think the future of mirrorless is likely sub APSc cameras. Fuji will not sell a full frame mirrorless cameras because they are convinced Canon and Nikon will eventually enter that market and dominate. So you are likely to get the best they produce unless they add a medium format camera system.

I am also reminded of an interview of one of the Canon executive several years ago. In it he stated the future of Canon DSLR would eventually be all full frame. There is a reason there are not any EFs L lenses. There has not been anything that suggests Canon is going to release a true enthusiast level EOS M anytime soon. I think we will see a full frame Rebel with a STM kit lens within a year or two. And, Canon will not truly enter the mirrorless market until they introduce a full frame mirrorless. The EOS-M is nothing but the next entry level Rebel line. 

As for the sweet spot for a more compact system it is likely m4/3. The current sensors are nearly as good APSc and the size advantage is greater. The camera manufactures are not in other markets so you are getting their best cameras.


----------



## Quackator (Jan 22, 2016)

For me there's not that much missing in the M3. 
I'd swap an EVF anytime for that friggin' flash, and I am desperate
for a switch to disable exposure simulation. Shooting radio triggered 
flash with a dark display is a major PITA.

I'd love WB as a menu entry that can be placed in "my menu".
Yes, I wouldn't refuse AF improvements, but it doesn't feel half
as bad as some people complain it is.

Both my main grievances (disable exposure simulation / WB in menu)
can be fixed in firmware updates.

Next up: Lenses. 

Done. 

For me, the M system is pretty good already.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 22, 2016)

tcmatthews said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > The next M system, a pro level system should be:
> ...



While "wishful thinking" might be a bit far, I think I tend to agree with you for the moment. Canon is a conservative company and does not make quick pivots. However, the title of this thread I believe was something along the lines of "What do you want to see in the next M?" and not what will "Canon executives approve in the next M".

For the record I own a Fuji X camera and have invested a tiny bit into the system. I do really like it and it seems to tick all the right boxes for the smaller compact/travel kit. I held off for a while as I'd prefer to not be invested into too many systems. Prior to buying the Fuji, I already had two M's and was holding out hope that Canon would bring a more enthusiast level M but alas I was disappointed. Ahhh well, I've now consolidated, unloading my 70D and all of my EF-S lenses. I now have a 6D with alot of Canon and 3rd party glass that has me covered for a wide variety of shooting. And I got the little Fuji with a couple of small primes to cover the "camera anywhere" or "out with the family but want a real camera with" type scenarios.

I don't think Rebel's are going full frame anytime soon. They are the bread and butter for Canon. However, I do see at some point, a model being available that is the same Rebel body, with identical ergonomics and controls, but having the mirror, etc. removed and the viewfinder replaced with an EVF. I see that happening long before Canon goes full frame only. Why abandon a market that is still vibrant and has and probably will continue to serve the company well?


----------



## Quackator (Jan 22, 2016)

Not to forget: A mirror box assembly costs around 30-40 dollars,
and the new Epson EVF module seen in the leica SL is likely very 
close in price (hard to nail because only direct sales, no distributors 
yet), while the display module in the EVF DC1 viewfinder is 
estimated at less than 25 dollars.

There is little to no cost advantage left in producing DSLRs.

Which in turn means that we have reached the point where a cost 
conscious company has a hard time sticking to OVF unless other
factors play a role.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 25, 2016)

Quackator said:


> Not to forget: A mirror box assembly costs around 30-40 dollars,
> and the new Epson EVF module seen in the leica SL is likely very
> close in price (hard to nail because only direct sales, no distributors
> yet), while the display module in the EVF DC1 viewfinder is
> estimated at less than 25 dollars.



where exactly did you get those numbers from?


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 25, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> The next M system, a pro level system should be:
> 
> 
> physical form factor size a bit bigger, like a fuji X-T1
> ...



after actually USING the M3 .. which i suspect many havent. and actually beginning to like the fact that the EVF is articulating, moving to a fixed left side rangefinder EVF or a fixed center slr-lite EVF is a step backward.

I suspect we'll get that as I would imagine something like the G3x is in the works for the M series, however IMO.. it's an idiotic move to just shut up a bunch of whiners and complainers that they didn't get an EVF in the damned box.

the only way the integrated EVF would make sense is something like the GX7/GX8 tilting EVF.

also ANY integrated EVF will make the M alot bigger than it is already, which also removes some of it's charm. if it's going to get bigger it had better be able to perform.


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 25, 2016)

crashpc said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > crashpc said:
> ...



well as i'm sure you are aware.. it switched from teh DLSR firmware to powershot. color science and color defaults also switched to powershot.

with EF-M lenses though, I find the M3 far superior image wise to the M - with the exception of IR. 

the M3 cannot be IR converted at all.


----------



## crashpc (Jan 25, 2016)

rrcphoto: things can be done, but far superior? Ugh, no, not really. I have not seen single shot superior in quality to the old M. I had a chance to have M3 for $380 new, and I still skipped.
That powershot thing is really big let down. And what about that small display? They definitely could put bigger one in there. The mechanism has great area for 3,5" if not larger.


----------



## dolina (Jan 25, 2016)

No need to wait. Just buy into a Sony mirrorless system. It has way more lenses than the EOS M will have. Comes in full frame too!


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 26, 2016)

crashpc said:


> rrcphoto: things can be done, but far superior? Ugh, no, not really. I have not seen single shot superior in quality to the old M. I had a chance to have M3 for $380 new, and I still skipped.
> That powershot thing is really big let down. And what about that small display? They definitely could put bigger one in there. The mechanism has great area for 3,5" if not larger.



well that's your problem. the M3 for color. excellent with the EF-M lenses. 24 versus 18mp and a finer grained noise structure = WIN.

the lenses react well to DPP + DLO and the resolution difference is most certainly there.

also a little more headroom than the 18mp older sensor.


----------



## yankl (Feb 8, 2016)

A built-in EVF, the tech is out there for a good one.
That's the most important thing, Canon please please PLEASE add an EVF to the EOS M4 with some good tracking options.

Also bring back the genius strap holders that where on the EOS M1.

Very important: Why the heck there is a flat cable behind the screen?? this is very vulnerable!! - make the screen without it as the rest of the industry does.

JD






Canon Rumors said:


> The EOS M system was launched in June 2012 to not much fanfare. It was <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO7rxitFLZg" target="_blank">immediately mocked</a> for perhaps the slowest autofocus in the history of digital cameras. The lack of lenses has also been an issue for the system getting any sort of mainstream acceptance. While Canon has improved the camera from the first iteration up to the current EOS M3, it’s still not a very compelling mirrorless system for a lot of consumers.</p>
> <p>I do own the EOS M3 and all of the EF-M lenses, but it’s likely always going to be my last choice walking out the door.</p>
> <p>What we want to see in an EOS M camera:</p>
> <ul>
> ...


----------



## scrup (Feb 11, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> with EF-M lenses though, I find the M3 far superior image wise to the M - with the exception of IR.
> 
> the M3 cannot be IR converted at all.



Yeah I agree as well. initially I didn't like the m3 colors but now that I got use to it, it is so much better. The only exception is with skintones under certain lighting conditions.

The m3 will be my last crop camera, I don't think there is much more that Canon can improve in terms of IQ and frankly for the 6x4s I print it is enough. Next camera will be a full frame for me, so hoping Canon does release one, in the mean time Sony is my only option, I will wait for a deal on the a7ii, hopefully sometime in spring.

The M3 introduced me to legacy lens, so I have a picked up a bunch of primes mainly around 50mm that I love to use. The main issue for me is the crop factor.


----------



## crashpc (Feb 21, 2016)

It would be nice to see two iterations of M4. One of these M/M-3 like with larger LCD and battery, still without EVF. 28Mpx sensor with ADC onboard would be nice. This setup would be nice for still photography, macros, long reach stills etc.


----------



## nestingdoll (Feb 25, 2016)

my wants for the M would be Pop up, hot shoe, EVF, touch, C1 C2 modes, lots of sensitive focus points, quick focus no lag... 

The IQ is fine, FF would be nice, I would have to realign my lens lineup a little for APC & everyday use... 

ติดตามบล็อกเกมสนุกมันส์ๆได้ที่นี่ 
olivergameonline
ambl-fanfic.tumblr


----------



## Haydn1971 (Feb 26, 2016)

Coming back to this one... Time for more glass !

Surely a pair of fast primes would energise the range, something in the 30-35mm range and another in the 50-56mm range would be nice, my 35mm f2 IS works nicely, but is huge on the EOS-M once you add on the adaptor.


----------



## tbjorkm (Apr 20, 2016)

I own a Sony NEX 5N mirrorless and it takes great pictures. I don't have a EVF or a built in flash. Which I want. I haven't upgraded yet because I was waiting for Canon to seriously get in the mirrorless game. The offerings to this point aren't an upgrade. I also have a Canon DSLR and would like to use some of those lenses so a Canon mirrorless option makes sense.

I'm hoping that Canon wants to be a real contender in this market place. It only makes sense.


----------

