# Canon EOS M2 Not Coming to North America



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 3, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/12/canon-eos-m2-not-coming-to-north-america/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/12/canon-eos-m2-not-coming-to-north-america/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>From Canon USA

</strong>Myself and <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=8488" target="_blank">Bryan over at TDP</a> were told by Canon USA contacts that there was “no announcement of the EOS M2 by Canon USA planned.” I also spoke with contacts in Norway and the UK, and both also said the same thing. I spoke earlier today with a contact at Canon Canada, and he hadn’t heard about the M2 until I mentioned it.</p>
<p>So it looks like the EOS M2 is going to be an Asia only product for the foreseeable future.</p>
<p>I was so bummed about the news <a href="https://twitter.com/canonrumorsguy/status/407949554605375490/photo/1" target="_blank">I went and picked one of these up</a>……..</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## jebrady03 (Dec 3, 2013)

if they were going to announce it, say for instance after the new year, do you think they would tell you right now?


----------



## preppyak (Dec 3, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> if they were going to announce it, say for instance after the new year, do you think they would tell you right now?


You'd think they would at least say "it will possibly come to the US".

But, the way Canon seems to do their leaks, they care a lot about making people think a product is coming to keep them from buying something else. The fact they just dropped this from nowhere and didnt mention a US presence makes me think it ain't coming to the US unless its a massive hit in Asia


----------



## jebrady03 (Dec 3, 2013)

What I'm getting at is, would these people even know? Realistically, no one knew anything truly specific about the launch of the M2 until yesterday?


----------



## skfla (Dec 3, 2013)

was anyone here really excited about this anyway? Digic 5? AF speed 21/4  times faster than what, the original M speed-original w/ updated firmware speed? I think most here would just pass on this one & wait for either another clearinghouse sale or the next level up becoming available. & given the SL1 sales, the general public may have done the same. I am a little surprised by their limited lens offerings on this line though


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 3, 2013)

For one thing, in the USA there is no way that an end to launched at $800 could compete with the current M priced $500 cheaper. There seem to be quite a few of those in retail channels right now.

Much like the Rebel/xxxD line, this update is very incremental. I don't think Canon believes many people will upgrade from one model year to the next at this consumer level of camera. These annual refreshes seem intended more to keep the product fresh, as in not outdated, on the consumer market. That motivation may be even more true in Asia.

I suspect (hope?) that when a version of the M with the 70D's sensor is released, Canon USA will bring that one to market.


----------



## BozillaNZ (Dec 3, 2013)

Is Canon fscking kidding? I can't see any meaningful difference between this camera and the previous one. Still no PDAF, no added controls, no onboard bounce-able flash, no EVF, no tilt screen, no nothing?! Oh yeah and the same old sh!t 18MP APS-C sensor with horrible DR and high ISO!

This is getting bored and I am so glad I started my small kit with the M43!

Canon, you are burning your customer's patience. And when that is gone, you will pay the price.

I started winding down my EF collection because I don't see Canon being a viable platform in 3-5 years anymore!

24L II is up for sale. Then the 16-35 II, sigh...

</rant>


----------



## jrista (Dec 3, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> For one thing, in the USA there is no way that an end to launched at $800 could compete with the current M priced $500 cheaper. There seem to be quite a few of those in retail channels right now.
> 
> Much like the Rebel/xxxD line, this update is very incremental. I don't think Canon believes many people will upgrade from one model year to the next at this consumer level of camera. These annual refreshes seem intended more to keep the product fresh, as in not outdated, on the consumer market. That motivation may be even more true in Asia.
> 
> I suspect (hope?) that when a version of the M with the 70D's sensor is released, Canon USA will bring that one to market.



With Sony now offering FF mirrorless, I don't really think Canon can compete in the US market without something comparable...and something with a particular edge (like DPAF, or even QPAF.) I don't care much for the Sony brand, but they are certainly putting up a lot of competition. The piddly little old EOS-M2, priced at $800, doesn't stand a chance in the US. Maybe they will release the FF EOS-MX in 2015...with a 54mp sensor...


----------



## sailingsilkeborg (Dec 3, 2013)

"Myself and Bryan... were told by Canon..."?

I don't like to be too nit-picky about grammar, since this site is supposed to be far more about photography and gear than it is about English, but... "Myself and Bryan..."? You've got to be kidding. How about, "Canon told Bryan and me..."?


----------



## mountain_drew (Dec 3, 2013)

I have a pretty basic setup so I'll be getting rid of my stuff to jump to Sony too.


----------



## dufflover (Dec 3, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> Canon, you are burning your customer's patience. And when that is gone, you will pay the price.
> ...
> </rant>



Definitely agree, though the latter probably won't come true for a while if ever.
If they made the size reduction a priority (which does mean an articulating screen, flash and EVF might make way for that), they could have still at least done more with the insides, namely that sensor. At rumoured $600 it's going down the exact same path as the original M. Except not even available in other markets.

(Hopefully including the same clear out soon after at a price where it's actually competitive ...)


----------



## hiplnsdrftr (Dec 3, 2013)

you... we're probably better off with a Panasonic GM1 or Ricoh GR anyways. I imagine that Olympus and Sony maybe sell a decent small camera as well? 

I just recently wore out my GF1 and will likely buy a GR this week.

Oh yeah, and then there's all the stuff from Fuji...


----------



## eml58 (Dec 3, 2013)

I certainly had hopes that Canon would go quite a bit farther with the M system, I own the current version, not a bad Camera, but not a good camera either when I look at what it needs to be a reasonably developed back up to my 1Dx & a possible replacement for my 5DMK III, the current M doesn't do it.

But the Image files aren't too bad from the current M, absence of a viewfinder is a big issue for me after having the current M, in day light the screen is almost useless.

So, my a7r arrived 3 days ago, still trying to work through the Menu system, not as bad as the Nikon System, but takes a while to work out.

Nice size, has a viewfinder, takes some getting used to but I like the viewfinder on a7r.

I was concerned after reading reports that the auto focus would be quite slow, but I'm using the a7r in dim lighting, very dim, and it focusses just fine quick & accurate. Files look very good to date but I'm yet to really put the is camera to the test considering the choices of Lens, well, make that choice, in Singapore the only Lens available is the Zeiss 35f/2.8, which is a lovely Lens, 55 arrives sometime late December.

Once I get a WA ( 15F/2.8 ) & a Macro ( 100f/2.8 ), I'll try & get the a7r into a Underwater housing, I have high hopes the a7r could replace my 5DMK III for underwater Imaging.

Like the Camera so far, has a load of the things I had hoped Canon might put into V2 of the M.

Image was shot with the M.


----------



## zlatko (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> Is Canon fscking kidding? I can't see any meaningful difference between this camera and the previous one. Still no PDAF, no added controls, no onboard bounce-able flash, no EVF, no tilt screen, no nothing?! Oh yeah and the same old sh!t 18MP APS-C sensor with horrible DR and high ISO!
> 
> This is getting bored and I am so glad I started my small kit with the M43!
> 
> ...



So even though Canon currently offers about twelve EOS cameras and about 70 EOS lenses, and fantastic wireless flashes and other accessories, the introduction of this one little $600 camera at the bottom of the EOS line in Asia only makes you conclude that Canon will not be a "viable platform". Because you are personally moving to a smaller format, you conclude that the entire EOS platform won't be "viable"?


----------



## Ruined (Dec 4, 2013)

Is this really a big surprise? With the abysmal sales of the EOS M combined with the general poor sales of mirrorless, there is not much market to win in the US. Further, Canon showed many signs of this ahead of time with the EOS M firesale plus the refusal to release the 11-22 lens...


----------



## arbitrage (Dec 4, 2013)

Well I'm glad I picked up a Fuji XE-2 with kit lens and the 23 f/1.4 That kit puts the EOS M2 to shame and I chose the Fuji over the A7r, because I don't want giant lenses on my mirror less body. I'll save my giant lenses for the 1DX.


----------



## candc (Dec 4, 2013)

Somebody tell metabones to hurry up and make a speedbooster/salesbooster for the m!


----------



## Act444 (Dec 4, 2013)

Sounds like it's only a minor upgrade anyway. It doesn't even have the 70D's dual pixel technology, so no big loss as far as I'm concerned. I do have the original M.


----------



## BozillaNZ (Dec 4, 2013)

zlatko said:


> So even though Canon currently offers about twelve EOS cameras and about 70 EOS lenses, and fantastic wireless flashes and other accessories, the introduction of this one little $600 camera at the bottom of the EOS line in Asia only makes you conclude that Canon will not be a "viable platform". Because you are personally moving to a smaller format, you conclude that the entire EOS platform won't be "viable"?



No, that's not the only time Canon let users down. They just seem to stuck in the old sensor era and for several previously released products, I don't see any evidence that they will ever come up with a camera that has better sensor than last 2-3 generations, while the gap between them and the competition is widening - fast.

From current situation, I can envision that in 5 years time, other systems will have a FF sensor of 40MP no-AA sensor with 15-16 stops of DR and good ISO, while Canon still keeps cranking out the pathetic 18MP APS-C sensors. And I'm saying that with a high probability of it becoming the fact.

Sure, we can all fool ourselves to say that the 5D3 sensor is good enough. But for how long? How long can you fool yourself for?

It's again pathetic to see that the brilliant 24-70 II on 5D3 would only give you the worse quality photo as the Tammy on a D800E in terms of resolution only (forget about DR). Good glass being wasted.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/a-24-70mm-system-comparison


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 4, 2013)

arbitrage said:


> Well I'm glad I picked up a Fuji XE-2 with kit lens and the 23 f/1.4 That kit puts the EOS M2 to shame and I chose the Fuji over the A7r, because I don't want giant lenses on my mirror less body. I'll save my giant lenses for the 1DX.



Well at $1,399 for a body and kit lens and $899 for the additional lens I would hope it would put my $299 kit to shame!


----------



## jebrady03 (Dec 4, 2013)

arbitrage said:


> Well I'm glad I picked up a Fuji XE-2 with kit lens and the 23 f/1.4 That kit puts the EOS M2 to shame and I chose the Fuji over the A7r, because I don't want giant lenses on my mirror less body. I'll save my giant lenses for the 1DX.



And you only spent $1900 more for it too! Or, almost 6x as much! Depending on your preference


----------



## zlatko (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > So even though Canon currently offers about twelve EOS cameras and about 70 EOS lenses, and fantastic wireless flashes and other accessories, the introduction of this one little $600 camera at the bottom of the EOS line in Asia only makes you conclude that Canon will not be a "viable platform". Because you are personally moving to a smaller format, you conclude that the entire EOS platform won't be "viable"?
> ...



The 5D3 and its sensor are more than good enough. It does a great job for some of the best photographers in some of the most demanding situations. Those photographers are no fools and neither are their clients or publishers. Sure, the 5D3 sensor may not meet the standards of a few sensor critics in online forums, but for actual photography it is fantastic. Canon sensors reached the point of "good enough" about 11 years ago when they were good enough to replace film cameras for many pro & amateur photographers. Since then, they've been refined many times, especially for high ISO. Of course they will continue to improve.


----------



## pharp (Dec 4, 2013)

http://www.ebay.com/sch/Digital-Cameras-/31388/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=canon+m2&_sop=15

especially at these prices


----------



## Woody (Dec 4, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> Well at $1,399 for a body and kit lens and $899 for the additional lens I would hope it would put my $299 kit to shame!



No kidding! ;D


----------



## candc (Dec 4, 2013)

Its a different market here than in Asia and the m hasn't sold that well. That's understandable, the m is a bit underwhelming on its own with its native compliment of lenses compared to the competition but with a speed booster adapter option it would give canon users that have a bunch of ff lenses an option for a small mirrorless camera that they could not only use their ff lenses on but would give them ff coverage and a whole stop faster aperture. That seems like a hotcake seller to me, I would buy one for sure


----------



## candc (Dec 4, 2013)

I would love to be able to use my 15mm fisheye on the m with a speed booster as a ff diagonal f/2 fisheye in a compact package


----------



## RobertP (Dec 4, 2013)

Given that the original M flopped in the US, Canon may feel that the M2 is not attractive enough for the American market. I'm confident that the articulated screen and sensor from the 70D (or at least their technologies) will make it in to a premium mirrorless camera next year. Its just such an obvious step for Canon to take.

Their may be 1 more generation left in DSLRs but with EVFs offering features that OVFs can't the mirror's days are looking numbered.


----------



## BozillaNZ (Dec 4, 2013)

zlatko said:


> The 5D3 and its sensor are more than good enough. It does a great job for some of the best photographers in some of the most demanding situations. Those photographers are no fools and neither are their clients or publishers. Sure, the 5D3 sensor may not meet the standards of a few sensor critics in online forums, but for actual photography it is fantastic. Canon sensors reached the point of "good enough" about 11 years ago when they were good enough to replace film cameras for many pro & amateur photographers. Since then, they've been refined many times, especially for high ISO. Of course they will continue to improve.



Problem is it's all about relative performance. We can argue that anything is enough for somebody, but right now here are better choices. 5D3 is more than enough for someone yes, and original 1Ds and 5D is more than enough for someone. Shall we just let the innovation die and stick to whatever we have 10 years ago? I don't like the thought of that.

The more Canon stagnate, the more unsatisfied it's user base will become. Sure you can 'convince yourself' but it's the same question of how long are you going to hold on to it while you see 'other guys' doing more and more thing that you can't.


----------



## candc (Dec 4, 2013)

RobertP said:


> Given that the original M flopped in the US, Canon may feel that the M2 is not attractive enough for the American market. I'm confident that the articulated screen and sensor from the 70D (or at least their technologies) will make it in to a premium mirrorless camera next year. Its just such an obvious step for Canon to take.
> 
> Their may be 1 more generation left in DSLRs but with EVFs offering features that OVFs can't the mirror's days are looking numbered.



I can envision a canon ff mirrorless big megapixel camera that has a crop mode like the d800 but it has an evf so the view changes to what you see is what you get instead of a red square in the ovf of the d800. That's the best of both worlds


----------



## infared (Dec 4, 2013)

eml58 said:


> I certainly had hopes that Canon would go quite a bit farther with the M system, I own the current version, not a bad Camera, but not a good camera either when I look at what it needs to be a reasonably developed back up to my 1Dx & a possible replacement for my 5DMK III, the current M doesn't do it.
> 
> But the Image files aren't too bad from the current M, absence of a viewfinder is a big issue for me after having the current M, in day light the screen is almost useless.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the input regarding the Sony...I cannot buy one...but I am eagerly watching the development of all-things mirrorless.


----------



## Bob Howland (Dec 4, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> For one thing, in the USA there is no way that an end to launched at $800 could compete with the current M priced $500 cheaper. There seem to be quite a few of those in retail channels right now.



And it certainly doesn't help that an SL1 body can currently be purchased from B&H for $500. The marketing of the M system has been one botch job after another.


----------



## Woody (Dec 4, 2013)

RobertP said:


> Given that the original M flopped in the US, Canon may feel that the M2 is not attractive enough for the American market. I'm confident that the articulated screen and sensor from the 70D (or at least their technologies) will make it in to a premium mirrorless camera next year. Its just such an obvious step for Canon to take.
> 
> Their may be 1 more generation left in DSLRs but with EVFs offering features that OVFs can't the mirror's days are looking numbered.



The EOS M is selling very well in USA now. In fact, much better than Nikon's 1 offerings. 

As for EVFs... until they can offer the same quick response, dynamic range and brightness as OVFs, mirrorless options are no-go for me. The fact that DSLRs outsell mirrorless cameras by 9.5:1 (8.5 in Europe), it appears that most folks agree with my assessment.


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 4, 2013)

RobertP said:


> Their may be 1 more generation left in DSLRs but with* EVFs offering features that OVFs can't *the mirror's days are looking numbered.



I think there are still a lot of features of OVF that EVF can't match which are particularly useful to most photographers. OVF is still better in low light and has infinitely faster refresh. Yes, I think EVF is more helpful when it comes to finding the correct exposure but you can't say that you can't trust your camera's own metering especially if you know how to effectively use spot metering.


----------



## zlatko (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D3 and its sensor are more than good enough. It does a great job for some of the best photographers in some of the most demanding situations. Those photographers are no fools and neither are their clients or publishers. Sure, the 5D3 sensor may not meet the standards of a few sensor critics in online forums, but for actual photography it is fantastic. Canon sensors reached the point of "good enough" about 11 years ago when they were good enough to replace film cameras for many pro & amateur photographers. Since then, they've been refined many times, especially for high ISO. Of course they will continue to improve.
> ...



I predict that they won't stagnate, but only time will tell. In the meantime, there is no need to convince anyone that the 5D3 sensor is good enough. That is proven by photographers every day. I welcome any improvements, but the current sensor certainly meets my needs, as well as the needs of photographers in far more demanding situations. I don't see "other guys'' doing anything more or anything I can't. If you find some extra dynamic range at low ISO makes a big honking difference in your photography, then by all means go for that sensor and consider the Canon platform "not viable" as you say. I don't see photography as some kind of race where the "other guy" is going to "win" because of low ISO dynamic range. Somehow, the Canon platform remains viable for some of the biggest names in photography, but what do they know? Perhaps this little M2 will drive them away from Canon too ...


----------



## RobertP (Dec 4, 2013)

Woody said:


> RobertP said:
> 
> 
> > Given that the original M flopped in the US, Canon may feel that the M2 is not attractive enough for the American market. I'm confident that the articulated screen and sensor from the 70D (or at least their technologies) will make it in to a premium mirrorless camera next year. Its just such an obvious step for Canon to take.
> ...



You're comparing today's mirror with today's EVF. I'm suggesting that the 5D Mark IV, when it arrives, will have a mirror but it will be the last in the line. When a 5D Mark V is due circa 2018 EVFs will have been refined to the point where the drawbacks have been minimised and that 9:1 ratio will have been reversed.


----------



## jrista (Dec 4, 2013)

RobertP said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > RobertP said:
> ...



Well, by 2018 the gap may have closed, but there is no way a 9:1 ratio of DSLR sales to mirrorless sales will "reverse"...to become a 1:9 ratio (9:1 in favor of mirrorless.) The DSLR has a decade plus long reign of prestige, and the SLR design in general has decades of prestige. Mirrorless won't that easily topple the respect the best camera design the world has yet seen.

Granted, things like Sony's A7r are very intriguing, and have even peaked my interest. We need to see how it sells, especially relative to DSLRs and perhaps the 5D III specifically, before we can claim that not only will it spell the literal demise of the DSLR, but a complete reversal of sales trends.

I suspect the DSLR's popularity will indeed fade, eventually. It will probably come sooner than I want, but I suspect it will take longer than one more generation before it completely disappears. Mirrorless is currently a powerful fad with a growing trend, but it has yet to really, truly, solidly PROVE itself in the extremely BROAD range of photographic endeavors the DSLR currently serves.


----------



## Famateur (Dec 4, 2013)

So I was looking on B&H for a Fuji equivalent of the 1DX. My search was unsuccessful... :

I find it curious how worked-up people get about the future of Canon and its survival as a company based on a consumer product in a market that (currently) is very small -- all manufacturers combined.

It also seems that some have assumed that every new camera model released must be of significant advancement so as to justify everyone upgrading from the previous model, and that if it doesn't meet this requirement, the company must be asleep at the wheel or on the verge of collapse. Do we hear the same predictions of doom every time Disney releases a movie like Beverly Hills Chihuahua 3? Will Disney crash and burn because every movie isn't at the level of The Incredibles or can't compete with the latest Oscar candidate for Best Picture?

How easily we forget that each of us, individually, doesn't represent the entire market. If Canon makes product decisions that don't meet my needs (or wants), it's more likely that market conditions don't warrant it than that the company is inept in recognizing and then meeting the market's needs. The M2 is simply a refresh of a consumer product to keep it "current". It's intended as a first-time mirrorless purchase, not an upgrade from the first M. Apparently, Canon management concluded that it was not worthwhile to release this refresh in the North American market. I assume that is based on market and cost analysis and not ineptitude. 

When I see the end zones of NFL football games lined with mirrorless Sony, Nikon and Fuji cameras in favor of the current crop (bad pun, sorry) of professional gear, maybe there will be cause for alarm. If it ever gets to that, though, I'm confident it still will be mostly filled with Canon gear.

[/soapbox]


----------



## cellomaster27 (Dec 4, 2013)

Nice buy CR Admin~ 8)

I have to say though, that it isn't much of a surprise that the M2 doesn't have DPAF. It makes sense for the 7DmII and maybe a future rebel to have that tech. I think the rebel line will see an increase in MP while the newer 5Dx, cine, and future xxD's will have the DPAF. It is great tech that they won't include in a model that is meant for a consumer line. My guess is in the 4th gen of eos-m that it'll have DPAF...when the tech is rather common in the canon digital camera lineup. In a marketing world, hey, it works. I commend Canon. ;D


----------



## mjardeen (Dec 4, 2013)

I think the SONY a7/r cameras are a turning point for mirror-less. What it needed was a really serious camera. SONY has to deliver on lenses. I think this is what will move Canon and Nikon. Time will tell.


----------



## pwp (Dec 4, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> “no announcement of the EOS M2 by Canon USA planned.”
> So it looks like the EOS M2 is going to be an Asia only product for the foreseeable future.


This has to be a good thing! For photographers like myself who were somewhat underwhelmed by the M2 specs, this leaves the door open for a higher spec M with the 70D (or better) sensor and EVF as well as the other evolutionary changes seen on the Asia-only M2. Though I doubt it's going to be ready for a 2013 Santa drop...

-pw


----------



## tomsop (Dec 4, 2013)

I have the eos-m and I did not realize when I got it that it would overwhelm my older computer and that I would miss the EVF of my canon rebel. 

The videos you shoot are almost worthless because they do not play back without serious stutter on my 2007 iMac and they take forever to upload to youtube. Never understood how I was supposed to process the videos so I could watch them. Even with the updated AF fix the AF is still really slow. 

As a camera designed to get us to reach for the camera instead of the iPhone, the product is ******* because it does not provide enough support or instructions on what to do with the video and I need too see more native lenses before I would consider upgrading to another dos-m. I will save my money and buy a real camera with a real viewfinder.


----------



## Hillsilly (Dec 4, 2013)

Famateur said:


> It also seems that some have assumed that every new camera model released must be of significant advancement so as to justify everyone upgrading from the previous model, and that if it doesn't meet this requirement, the company must be asleep at the wheel or on the verge of collapse....



People just get upset at missed opportunities. It has already been mentioned above that about 1/10th of serious camera buyers are into mirrorless cameras. It has also been mentioned that mirrorless buyers are happy to spend more on a mirrorless camera than would seem rational. You could then assume that an identifiable/sizeable portion of Canon camera buyers want a well built, feature packed mirrorless camera and are willing to pay for it. And given that Canon has developed a lot of the tech to make a great mirrorless camera, I can sympathise with those who think the M2 is a let down. Canon can do so much better.

This M2 announcement causes another problem for Canon. It sends a clear message to many that Canon isn't serious about mirrorless and won't be for some time (if ever). (Of course the M1 also sent that message loud and clear - are there still only 2 lenses for it, one of which you can't even buy in half of the world?) Therefore, all of those who are mirrorless curious are just going to pick up a Fuji, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica etc. If they invest into those systems and like it (as I did with Fuji), they're not going to quickly switch back. All of sudden, Canon has lost a large swathe of early adopters who would otherwise be proudly espousing the benefits of Canon mirrorless cameras to their non-Canon friends. By the way, have I mentioned how awesome the Fuji 14mm is? And have you checked out the flash synch times on the X-100S - what kind of creative opportunities would that provide you? (Anyway, you get the idea - deep down, I'm still a Canon fanboi.)


----------



## BozillaNZ (Dec 4, 2013)

Hillsilly said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > It also seems that some have assumed that every new camera model released must be of significant advancement so as to justify everyone upgrading from the previous model, and that if it doesn't meet this requirement, the company must be asleep at the wheel or on the verge of collapse....
> ...



Yes, I found the fact that people come up with all kinds of excuses to justify that what Canon have done is good, which is strange! What aspect of M2 is done good compared to the M1? The fact that it is (ever so slightly) smaller? And comes with WiFi? To me that is not good enough!

The reason that I'm bashing it is because I think it could have done so much better, given what it already has in it's sleeve now.


----------



## eml58 (Dec 4, 2013)

infared said:


> Thanks for the input regarding the Sony...I cannot buy one...but I am eagerly watching the development of all-things mirrorless.



Me too, I think Sony are on the right track with the a7/a7r, they've let themselves down with a mediocre approach to the Marketing side, basically you can choose from a Sony zoom, or the Zeiss 35 at launch, the Zeiss is excellent though.

I went to process some RAW files from the a7r today and was left a little Gob Smacked that not even Sony (as far as I could find out) have a full on software set to process files from the a7r, all I could find was some hopeless system called "PlayMemoriesHome", which allows you to view and do some minor cropping but no conversion from the RAW format, hopeless. Fortunately I found Adobe has a release 5.3 that does allow the files to be worked in PS/LR5. 

I really do hope Canon at some point decide to get serious re mirror less, but I can't see any real signs at present, in the meantime I'll play with the a7r for a while and see what the possibilities are, and pick up the 1Dx or the 5DMK III when i need to get serious.


----------



## zlatko (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> Hillsilly said:
> 
> 
> > Famateur said:
> ...



It could have been so much better for you. You wanted it to have an EVF, tilt-screen, built-in flash, added controls, new sensor, etc. And then of course it would be a very different camera, with a different size & shape and a different price point. It would have been better for you, but it would have been worse for others. Indeed, add all of those features and some likely buyers will instantly lose interest — because they don't want any of them. Some people will like the M2 just the way it is, especially with the improved AF, as appears in this video - http://cweb.canon.jp/newsrelease/2013-12/pr-eos-m2.html

Who knows, something like your version of the M2 might be on Canon's calendar. But even a company as large as Canon can't and won't try to fill every market niche. If M43 already offers the camera you want, why blame Canon for not building the camera that someone else already builds? We don't blame Fuji for not offering anything like the 1DX or 5D3, or like some of Canon's fantastic lenses.

We can all bash a camera for not being built to our personal specifications, and miss the point that it meets other people's needs very well. I could bash the 5D3 for not being lighter & smaller, but then it would have to be a different camera, and such a camera might be worse for people who like it just the way it is. I could bash the SL1 for not having a big 2,000 shot battery, but then it would have to be a different camera, and worse for some people who like it small the way it is.


----------



## spinworkxroy (Dec 4, 2013)

People no longer buy gear that just does enough..
We buy new cameras and of course expect to have new tech inside, regardless if we need it or not or if the old tech works as well..that's no longer the point.
It's all about innovation and keeping up with the times. when another company releases something new, it will most definitely be something "new" worth upgrading to. Canon seems to be the only one releasing new models using old tech and not changing much else. 
We just feel short changed that's all..it's not because we need the new tech..it's because we're paying for something new, we'd want something new.


----------



## Hillsilly (Dec 4, 2013)

zlatko said:


> ....We can all bash a camera for not being built to our personal specifications, and miss the point that it meets other people's needs very well.



Sadly, I'll never know if it meets my needs. Living outside of Japan, I will never see one.


----------



## Woody (Dec 4, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> We just feel short changed that's all..it's not because we need the new tech..it's because we're paying for something new, we'd want something new.



Well said. 

That was certainly my thoughts when I got myself an OMD EM5 a year ago. It was one of the most celebrated cameras on the planet at that time, having won the DPReview Camera of the Year award over its closest competitor, the Nikon D800.

Well, one year later, I dumped the EM5 together with a whole bunch of accessories and lenses. It's not for me. Yes, it's got some nifty new technology, but the old and reliable DSLRs serve my needs better. 8)

My point is that the latest and best technology need not necessarily be what we really need.


----------



## spinworkxroy (Dec 4, 2013)

Woody said:


> Well said.
> 
> That was certainly my thoughts when I got myself an OMD EM5 a year ago. It was one of the most celebrated cameras on the planet at that time, having won the DPReview Camera of the Year award over its closest competitor, the Nikon D800.
> 
> ...



Exactly, we never need the latest iphones or Samsung smartphones but every since year they release a new model, i will buy the latest model and do exactly the same thing on it as i did with the previous model....surf internet and make calls...hecl i think a phone 3 years ago did the same thing for me as well! We always want the latest and if we're paying for the latest, there had better be new tech inside  We're all gear lusting hehe..we need help.


----------



## BozillaNZ (Dec 4, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> Exactly, we never need the latest iphones or Samsung smartphones but every since year they release a new model, i will buy the latest model and do exactly the same thing on it as i did with the previous model....surf internet and make calls...hecl i think a phone 3 years ago did the same thing for me as well! We always want the latest and if we're paying for the latest, there had better be new tech inside  We're all gear lusting hehe..we need help.



But when some company brings the same old sh!t and call it brand new and asks for a premium, we have a problem. However apparently some people are perfectly happy about that too...


----------



## BozillaNZ (Dec 4, 2013)

zlatko said:


> It could have been so much better for you. You wanted it to have an EVF, tilt-screen, built-in flash, added controls, new sensor, etc. And then of course it would be a very different camera, with a different size & shape and a different price point.



I wanted ONE of the features that I listed to barely justify it being a new model, but apparently Canon delivered NONE. I see no purpose of this release at all.

Now you tell me, what's the difference between M1 and M2 again?


----------



## lw (Dec 4, 2013)

What Canon actually said was "*At this time* we have no plans to announce in the U.S."

And what Canon UK said was "*Currently*, it is not planned to range the EOS M2 in Europe. Distribution and demand will be constantly reviewed and* the situation may change in the future*.'

My take is that Canon US were planning on launching the M2 at CES in January - that would be inline with the same US-based rumour sites saying "no new cameras this year". Canon Asia has simply 'jumped the gun'

In the meantime the US and EU have inventories of Ms to shift, and didn't want the M2 to stop that. The UK has a Christmas cashback promotion on the M for example, and clearly would want that to finish and help them clear any remaining inventories before launching a new camera in the new year.

Even if the US and EU see the M2 as a minor upgrade (I don't myself), they still need the M2 in order to be more competitive in the CSC market - why try and compete with a poorer camera when a better version is readily available?

Why would Canon US and EU continue to promote and laud the features of the M as their (only) CSC camera, when everybody and their dog will know full well there is a much better model available that addresses the known weaknesses of the current M?

At some point the inventory of current M cameras is going to dry up. Canon are not going to make both the M and M2. The inventory may have already started to dry up in Asia forcing them to launch the M2 now.

So what happens then? The US and EU just keep selling EF-M lenses, but no camera? Pull out of the CSC market entirely, or put it on hold and try and re-enter at a later date, when potential customers have already gone elsewhere?

And if the US and EU are waiting for a M Pro model to be even more competitive on features they believe are required, they would still need a entry level M2 to complement it and suck new users in - one camera a system does not make.

And how long is it before the M Pro appears? Weeks, months? What do the US and EU sell in the meantime? Nothing? And just send any CSC purchasers into the willing arms of their competitors?

The rumours always were for two new M cameras.

I think we will still see both the M2 and possibly the M Pro launched at CES or early in the new year.


----------



## dufflover (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> But when some company brings the same old sh!t and call it brand new and asks for a premium, we have a problem. However apparently some people are perfectly happy about that too...



Well said!
Or worse they trot out the usual "you don't _need_ this or that" to take good photos. Never the disputed point to begin with. I just want my hard earned (which us enthusiasts spend a lot of on photography) to get good value.

It'd be like Apple still charging $700 for same iPhone year after year calling it brand new in only one rehashed way. oh wait they already do that don't they  

lol j/k


----------



## RobertP (Dec 4, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> RobertP said:
> 
> 
> > Their may be 1 more generation left in DSLRs but with* EVFs offering features that OVFs can't *the mirror's days are looking numbered.
> ...



I'm not sure where the disagreement is here. I'm not suggesting that everybody should go mirrorless tomorrow. The 5D Mark IV will have a mirror. Mirrorless cameras are lighter than SLRs and there are no back focusing issues to worry about. PDAF on a sensor is here. Its only a matter of time before it reaches 1DX speeds. EVFs are improving and our eyes don't have infinite refresh. When I said that the mirror's days were numbered I meant years not days.

The only reason I'd take a Canon 6D over a Sony A7 is the lack of lenses for the A7. There isn't a lens out there for the A7 that I want. I'd rather have an M2 with a pancake lens than the 6D or A7. If I have to compromise then I'll take portability over low light performance and dynamic range.


----------



## Woody (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> But when some company brings the same old sh!t and call it brand new and asks for a premium, we have a problem. However apparently some people are perfectly happy about that too...



Most folks got their Math wrong. One cannot directly convert the Japanese Yen prices to USD/Euro. Rather, price of EOS-M2 18-55 STM kit vs that of EOS-M kit is about 35% higher. So, if one is paying US$300 for the original EOS-M 18-55 kit, the updated version will cost about US$400 (if it's ever made available in USA), not US$800 that most people expect. So, slightly more expensive than what one expects, but still cheap compared to the competition.


----------



## scyrene (Dec 4, 2013)

How can people feel short changed by something they haven't bought? I completely understand the desire for better products (although how some people define 'better' seem rather short-sighted), but if something is released that isn't for you, you don't have to buy it. The money we've spent on cameras and lenses in the past was for them alone, it doesn't entitle us to anything in future. If a company moves in a direction we don't like, we don't have to go with them, but stamping our feet and threatening a tantrum (which seems the equivalent of proclaiming 'I'm going to sell all my gear and move to another brand') strikes me as rather immature.

The M2 doesn't impact me one way or the other, so why should I care? If I was in the market for this type of camera, I'd look at what's available now and choose one (and I would advise others to do the same), not wait around for possible future products.

Incidentally, it's not true that _only_ Canon releases new gear that is similar to old lines. It's bewildering how many compact cameras and superzooms come out every few months, whose specifications seem hardly different from the existing ones. And wasn't the D610 essentially identical to the D600, to pick a single example?


----------



## BJDrew (Dec 4, 2013)

eml58 said:


> Like the Camera so far, has a load of the things I had hoped Canon might put into V2 of the M.
> 
> Image was shot with the M.


Funny, I jumped ship from Canon but kept the M to take pictures of my Sony stuff as well. It is worthless on the used market so makes a nice tool for making quick videos.

After seeing the very first files, I was like "What was I doing all this time?!?"


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 4, 2013)

lw said:


> Why would Canon US and EU continue to promote and laud the features of the M as their (only) CSC camera, when everybody and their dog will know full well there is a much better model available that addresses the known weaknesses of the current M?



Because everybody and their guinea pigs know that "addressing" the known weaknesses doesn't mean *solving* them, so you might as well buy a cheap M1 rather than a half-baked M2.

Canon's one tech advantage is the dual pixel af... meaning the M2 will have a very short life and the only reason the M3 with the 70d's sensor isn't here yet would be that the r&d timeline of the M and EOS weren't in sync so they produce the M2 as an intermediary product. In the computer/phone market this happens all the time, short-lived "soon to be outdated" products are Asia only since the market seems to be faster over there, less shipping and less global ad costs.

It also might indicate that the US have also reached the point of not being a primary market anymore - until now my observation was only the EU didn't get some of the latest phone/computer/... updates but older overstocked versions - the global economy seems to be changing.


----------



## jazz55 (Dec 4, 2013)

scyrene said:


> How can people feel short changed by something they haven't bought? I completely understand the desire for better products (although how some people define 'better' seem rather short-sighted), but if something is released that isn't for you, you don't have to buy it. The money we've spent on cameras and lenses in the past was for them alone, it doesn't entitle us to anything in future. If a company moves in a direction we don't like, we don't have to go with them, but stamping our feet and threatening a tantrum (which seems the equivalent of proclaiming 'I'm going to sell all my gear and move to another brand') strikes me as rather immature.
> 
> The M2 doesn't impact me one way or the other, so why should I care? If I was in the market for this type of camera, I'd look at what's available now and choose one (and I would advise others to do the same), not wait around for possible future products.
> 
> Incidentally, it's not true that _only_ Canon releases new gear that is similar to old lines. It's bewildering how many compact cameras and superzooms come out every few months, whose specifications seem hardly different from the existing ones. And wasn't the D610 essentially identical to the D600, to pick a single example?



Thank you for expressing how I feel, but I will also add my two cents' worth. As a current owner of an M, I was planning to buy the new model with a 22mm kit lens since I have the 18-55 and recently bought the 11-22. My friends and I do a lot of hiking. Thus, the small form factor influenced my decision to go with this camera model. I am an amateur so I'm not that invested in cameras. I would like and am willing to spend more on a new model so that I don't have to change lenses on my camera regularly (I am afraid to clean my sensor). Due to the low price of the original M, Canon has me in their fold (Canon Strategy Step 1). In essence, I am the consumer which Canon's marketing may be targeting. Since the M2 is not available in NA, I will wait and while doing so, continue to plan for my next DSLR and lenses, likely a Canon (Canon Strategy Step 2). I realize others may have pressing needs for a more sophisticated model, but it is evident no manufacturer can tailor a model for each individual. That is why there is a Canon (or Nikon, or Sony, etc.) system from which anyone can choose different models. All a manufacturer can do is carry out a market analysis and create models targeting consumers based on such analysis. Whether or not Canon currently has the technology for the features you and I want, no one seems to know. If they don't, then we are free to choose the model with the features we need/want from another manufacturer. Many times I have read that Canon is a very conservative company so perhaps they are waiting to see how Sony, Nikon and others succeed or fail with mirrorless systems before they fully commit. I have many friends (old and young) who take pictures with their cell phones and are happy with their results. They are not even aware of mirrorless cameras. However, they are aware of P&Ss and DSLRs and of all the manufacturers, they are most familiar with Canon and Nikon and to some extent, Sony and Olympus. My guess is that when these friends decide to buy a camera, they will first turn to these familiar brands and with Canon being the most familiar brand at the moment, well, you know...


----------



## zlatko (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > It could have been so much better for you. You wanted it to have an EVF, tilt-screen, built-in flash, added controls, new sensor, etc. And then of course it would be a very different camera, with a different size & shape and a different price point.
> ...


It seems you didn't watch the video I linked to. Clearly the AF is improved and the screen doesn't black out after each exposure, and that is a good thing considering all of the complaints about AF with the first M. Adding one of the features you wanted would have been nice for you, but not for someone else. It seems Canon is not going to build your personal camera, so you can settle for one of the 40 or so cameras that they do build (not counting video cameras), or buy from another brand that maybe builds something closer to your personal camera. If adding just one feature would have met your threshold for having a purpose, then you are just counting features. Some customers will enjoy the small refinements, not wanting a different camera with different features.


----------



## zlatko (Dec 4, 2013)

Hillsilly said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > ....We can all bash a camera for not being built to our personal specifications, and miss the point that it meets other people's needs very well.
> ...


This is not such a big deal. For example, the 10-22mm lens for the M is not sold in the US, but you can order it online from sellers in Japan and Korea.


----------



## Proffarm (Dec 4, 2013)

scyrene said:


> How can people feel short changed by something they haven't bought? I completely understand the desire for better products (although how some people define 'better' seem rather short-sighted), but if something is released that isn't for you, you don't have to buy it. The money we've spent on cameras and lenses in the past was for them alone, it doesn't entitle us to anything in future. If a company moves in a direction we don't like, we don't have to go with them, but stamping our feet and threatening a tantrum (which seems the equivalent of proclaiming 'I'm going to sell all my gear and move to another brand') strikes me as rather immature.
> 
> The M2 doesn't impact me one way or the other, so why should I care? If I was in the market for this type of camera, I'd look at what's available now and choose one (and I would advise others to do the same), not wait around for possible future products.
> 
> Incidentally, it's not true that _only_ Canon releases new gear that is similar to old lines. It's bewildering how many compact cameras and superzooms come out every few months, whose specifications seem hardly different from the existing ones. And wasn't the D610 essentially identical to the D600, to pick a single example?



Well considering that you are in an EOS M thread I think it is safe to assume that many of us posting here _are_ in the market for a mirrorless system and are very dissapointed with the way things look to be turning out for the M. 
I am not one of those with a limitless supply of funds for camera/gear. I have 2 little ones in daycare and a wife that doesn't accept financial tomfoolery, as I don't either. I absolutely love my M and credit purchasing this awesome little camera with getting me back into my first, and most intense hobby. I love this system for a number of reasons, first and foremost being the size and portability of it. I hike and ride extensively and this has just fit right in. But I chose the M for 2 reasons: I had been with Canon for about 10 years with a 20D and then a 40D, and because of the firesale price. I felt loyal to Canon because, even though I didn't use them very much, I really loved those to cameras. As for the price of the M, I concede that to complain and whine when I bought it at bargain basement price is a littly petty, but since getting the kit I’ve purchased the other two lenses, flash and filters. I have-what I consider to be-a sizeable investment in the Canon version of the mirror less system now. I was really looking forward to a version of the M that would have been more in line with the OMD EM1/5, EP-5 or GX7. Now it's looking very sketchy that we will EVER see that from Canon. 

So yes, it pisses me off because now I feel like I've been marginalized by Canon because of my geographic location. Secondly, I am REALLY not interested in selling off all my stuff at probably half or, if I'm lucky, 2/3rds what I paid for it just to get me about 2/3rds the way there to an EP-5, or GX7. 

And before I get flamed I'll also acknowledge that in the big scheme of things this is not a big deal. But in my little photography world that I live in on the weekends...this is supremely frustrating hahahahaha...


----------



## zlatko (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> spinworkxroy said:
> 
> 
> > Exactly, we never need the latest iphones or Samsung smartphones but every since year they release a new model, i will buy the latest model and do exactly the same thing on it as i did with the previous model....surf internet and make calls...hecl i think a phone 3 years ago did the same thing for me as well! We always want the latest and if we're paying for the latest, there had better be new tech inside  We're all gear lusting hehe..we need help.
> ...


It's an improved camera, and the "premium" is a little more, as Woody explained above. It's still a relatively cheap camera, at the bottom of the EOS line in size & features. It's not a camera that I personally need, but I can see it being perfect for some people. And the people for whom it is perfect will not be complaining about the sensor having "only" 18mp or being "old". They are not "gear lusting", but rather just looking for a camera that makes good photos and is super easy to carry anywhere. Canon wisely doesn't make gear just for "gear lusters" who frequent online forums. They know their market is bigger than that.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 4, 2013)

BozillaNZ said:


> But when some company brings the same old sh!t and call it brand new and asks for a premium, we have a problem. However apparently some people are perfectly happy about that too...



Yes, apparently enough people have been happy with that "old" 18 MP sensor to keep Canon at the top of the dSLR market for many years.


----------



## jfretless (Dec 4, 2013)

Am I missing something? Just because they are not being launched in the US, Canada, Europe, doesn't mean they are banned in those regions, correct? We can still buy one from a Japanese retailer, or have a friend in Japan buy one and then ship it to you. ...or even better, if you are lucky enough to travel to Japan for work, buy one yourself. ...and if you do that and worried about customs, Narita airport had a Akihabara duty free shop, so you can buy it there, worse case. I purchased a Casio bluetooth watch (not available in the US) for about the same price I would have paid here through a eBay retailer in Japan. ...and had no issues with customs.

John


----------



## Chris Burch (Dec 4, 2013)

I am personally quite happy to see this "upgrade" launched in the US because it allows me to keep up hope that a better version is coming here. The new version is disappointingly low on improved features. I REALLY REALLY REALLY want DPAF on this camera and would buy it in a heartbeat if it comes out that way. It will save me from having to buy yet another full-sized DSLR for the few times a year I shoot video, plus I could use a decent compact camera.


----------



## scyrene (Dec 4, 2013)

Proffarm said:


> Well considering that you are in an EOS M thread I think it is safe to assume that many of us posting here _are_ in the market for a mirrorless system and are very dissapointed with the way things look to be turning out for the M.
> I am not one of those with a limitless supply of funds for camera/gear. I have 2 little ones in daycare and a wife that doesn't accept financial tomfoolery, as I don't either. I absolutely love my M and credit purchasing this awesome little camera with getting me back into my first, and most intense hobby. I love this system for a number of reasons, first and foremost being the size and portability of it. I hike and ride extensively and this has just fit right in. But I chose the M for 2 reasons: I had been with Canon for about 10 years with a 20D and then a 40D, and because of the firesale price. I felt loyal to Canon because, even though I didn't use them very much, I really loved those to cameras. As for the price of the M, I concede that to complain and whine when I bought it at bargain basement price is a littly petty, but since getting the kit I’ve purchased the other two lenses, flash and filters. I have-what I consider to be-a sizeable investment in the Canon version of the mirror less system now. I was really looking forward to a version of the M that would have been more in line with the OMD EM1/5, EP-5 or GX7. Now it's looking very sketchy that we will EVER see that from Canon.
> 
> So yes, it pisses me off because now I feel like I've been marginalized by Canon because of my geographic location. Secondly, I am REALLY not interested in selling off all my stuff at probably half or, if I'm lucky, 2/3rds what I paid for it just to get me about 2/3rds the way there to an EP-5, or GX7.
> ...



That's fair enough, but a couple of things should reassure you. First, you *can* buy it from Japan via the internet (or it may come to your market next year); second, everyone is convinced there will be a second new M model at some point next year too (and the assumption is its distribution won't be so restricted). It's not been out that long in the grand scheme of things. I'm no expert on their business model, but I can't see them abandoning the M project so quickly, especially now sales have picked up a bit.

I've nearly taken the plunge with the M myself, but there's always another EF lens to get and it's pushed down the list of priorities. I'm sure we're all hoping they do more with it in future - so long as it's not priced too high.


----------



## Proffarm (Dec 4, 2013)

scyrene said:


> Proffarm said:
> 
> 
> > Well considering that you are in an EOS M thread I think it is safe to assume that many of us posting here _are_ in the market for a mirrorless system and are very dissapointed with the way things look to be turning out for the M.
> ...



I just got over excited at the idea of a high-end M.. 

I haven't given up hope altogether, but I think it really does look fairly bleak.. The thing is, I want the capabilities that the EP-5 and GX7 have really, really badly, but I'm probably not going to sell this year.. I'll just hold out, hoping agains hope in my little photography man-cave until I can't anymore.. 

LOL


----------



## jrista (Dec 4, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> BozillaNZ said:
> 
> 
> > But when some company brings the same old sh!t and call it brand new and asks for a premium, we have a problem. However apparently some people are perfectly happy about that too...
> ...



Doesn't change the fact that that old 18mp sensor needs to be replaced. Generally I think Canon is an innovative company and makes great products...but reusing the 18mp AGAIN really does feel like Canon is giving their customers a collective slap in the face with a little "Haha! Got you to buy one again! Nah! Nah!" So far, despite Canon's dominance...rather, maybe because of it...EOS-M is the LEAST innovative and compelling product Canon has released in recent years. 

They can do better. They should do better. Their customers deserve better.

To be blunt, I won't be buying any EOS-M body until it has a newer sensor...at the very least, the 20mp DPAF sensor, but I am still holding out hope they will offer something even better.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 4, 2013)

jrista said:


> but reusing the 18mp AGAIN really does feel like Canon is giving their customers a collective slap in the face with a little "Haha! Got you to buy one again! Nah! Nah!"



No doubt Canon is behind in sensor performance in relative terms, but you're having a top-down perspective:

Sony is currently advertising their mirrorless aps-c in Germany and the main point is that has a *large* sensor - aps-c! - and the *same* as in their "pro" aps-c dslrs. Obviously a lot of folks shooting iPhone consider a crop sensor as a step up, and in absolute terms in good light there is indeed nothing wrong with it but it's quite capable. 

So I'd take the "bottom-up" perspective: There's nothing wrong with the M1/M2 sensor, but I'd personally wonder why I should buy a 70d in 2014 with about the same sensor performance for a whole lot of money more, not everyone is into bird or child tracking.


----------



## jrista (Dec 4, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > but reusing the 18mp AGAIN really does feel like Canon is giving their customers a collective slap in the face with a little "Haha! Got you to buy one again! Nah! Nah!"
> ...



I'm not saying that Canon needs to dump the 18mp sensor because of external competition. I'm saying they need to dump it because they themselves already have better technology, and there is absolutely no reason not to utilize the 20mp DPAF sensor in the EOS-M2. I don't believe it would cannibalize 70D sales at all...different class of camera.

Not everyone may be into birds or children, true...but for the market segment where the EOS-M line fits best, a LOT of people are interested in video...and it is video where DPAF truly shines, what it was specifically designed for. Personally, I'd love to haul along an EOS-M with 20mp DPAF sensor whenever I go out shooting. I could either set it up with a little mount on top of my camera, and just let it rip, filming whatever I am shooting (kind of like a GoPro, only WAY better! )...or I could set it up on a second tripod, and let it record beside me.

From what I understand about Hybrid AF, the fact that it requires a two stage PD->CD AF approach means it will never track well, if at all, and if the subject moves out of focus, then you will always have the potential for that CDAF stage which is immensely obvious and annoying in video. 

All I am saying is, Canon can do better. They can do better not because they have to, or because of competition...but because they already have. It seems quite clear people in the US WANT the EOS-M...it isn't that they don't, it is simply that Canon is really doing a piss-poor job making it a compelling product for this marketplace. They don't even necessarily need to spend a lot of money on it...the 20mp DPAF sensor and two or three new basic lenses would do it. They could probably get away with that for 2% of their total annual R&D budget, if even that much, and they would probably make bank... The whole EOS-M in the US is a strange ordeal, it doesn't feel like the Canon I've known for some six years plus now, and to be quite frank...it is a little frustrating.

I've never liked Sony electronics. I've had them in the past. I've known friends who live and die by Sony. But when compared to other products...I've always found better quality in Sony's competitors. Instead of a Sony TV, I went with a Samsung TV. Instead of a Sony car stereo, I went with a Pioneer. I once purchased a Sony laptop, their 18.4" 1080p HD laptop...total piece of junk that failed within a couple months, had to have a repair man out to my house (after nearly a year of trying to get support to help) to take the thing apart and replace the entire motherboard. I've found ASUS and even Lenovo ultrabooks and tablets to be far superior, more reliable products (even though they are supposedly lower rung products). So on and so forth... 

I could use a mirrorless companion to my DSLR. It'll never replace what my DSLR does, but in the circumstances where I need a portable camera with a high quality sensor that is capable of shooting video with smooth focus tracking...Canon HAS the technology (they just aren't utilizing it), and I am truly loath to buy an A7r. I've handled Sony DSLR cameras, and their lenses...on quite a number of occasions, as I do with Nikon cameras whenever I'm in proximity to them at Mikes Camera or another store that has them. If I really had to, I'd move to Nikon, or at least add Nikon to my kit. Sony...not so much. Their products have always felt of lesser quality than both Canon and Nikon. They feel too light and like plastic, like breakable toys. Their lenses don't have the same solid, professional, properly damped feel as a Nikon or Canon lens. Things don't seem to perform as well or as fast on a Sony camera (speaking about DSLRs here, as they are my only regular first hand experience with Sony cameras.) Problem is...Sony has the most _compelling _mirrorless product on the market. It certainly has a damn good sensor...but, as Nero himself often says...the sensor is rarely the single most important aspect of a camera. It's *everything else* I wonder about, and I don't think I'll ever be able to shake the feeling that someone else, even Canon, can do a significantly better job than Sony at building a quality mirrorless camera.

That is...if they only would... :-\


----------



## scyrene (Dec 4, 2013)

Proffarm said:


> I just got over excited at the idea of a high-end M..
> 
> I haven't given up hope altogether, but I think it really does look fairly bleak.. The thing is, I want the capabilities that the EP-5 and GX7 have really, really badly, but I'm probably not going to sell this year.. I'll just hold out, hoping agains hope in my little photography man-cave until I can't anymore..
> 
> LOL



I reckon if it's urgent, and you can't be sure there isn't a high-end one (before a set date), then by all means sell. You can always come back into the fold - resale prices are pretty good. Good luck either way


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 4, 2013)

jrista said:


> Canon HAS the technology (they just aren't utilizing it),



Do they really have it?

I'm the first one to say Canon boldly milks their products to the last cent before innovating, but afaik the exmor sensor design is patented so using a smaller cmos structure wouldn't solve everything. As for the mirrorless future Canon does not have a good evf, nobody has, so for the time being the dual pixel af is limited to amateur/quick video. They might have new DO lenses, but nobody ever saw an actual product yet, so they might not even have that. They do use their (hybrid) IS system and good usm af in lenses. So what real innovations apart from the 20mp 70d sensor do they have they don't use?

Concerning the latter, I'm convinced the M2 is a short-lived products and will be shortly replaced by a M3 with dual pixel af, that's the reason they don't even export the model outside Asia.



jrista said:


> and I am truly loath to buy an A7r.



I agree about what you wrote about Sony, whenever I get a Sony store I try their new toys but it's also not for me, I don't seem to be a Sony person. Nikon, well, I had thought long about switching before I bought my more expensive lenses for Canon, but I remained on this side because of Magic Lantern (focus stacking, focus peaking, bracketing, intervalometer, ...) and because I can program my own dslr.

Other than that, it's really just illogical brand attachment because my first dslr was a Canon 620 and I loved my EOS RT, but I don't doubt Nikon would also have been a good choice - esp. when buying Tamron and Sigma lenses, currently it seems a bit strange to favor Canon cameras below the famed 1dx/5d3 af system.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 4, 2013)

jrista said:


> I'm not saying that Canon needs to dump the 18mp sensor because of external competition. I'm saying they need to dump it because they themselves already have better technology, and *there is absolutely no reason not to utilize the 20mp DPAF sensor in the EOS-M2*. I don't believe it would cannibalize 70D sales at all...different class of camera.



No reason that you know of... For example, what if the more complicated circuit printing results in a higher QC failure rate? That might raise the production cost of the sensor to the point where it is not cost-effective to put in a camera body that may end up selling for $300.

Also, maybe to you it's just "the same old 18 MP sensor." But to Canon, it's a "new" sensor that to date has only been used in one prior camera body – the SL1/100D. Undoubtedly, Canon incurred development costs for Hybrid CMOS AF II, and it is quite likely that the SL1 alone is not sufficient to recoup those costs to yield a return on that investment.

I'm not saying you're wrong to suggest that Canon _should_ put their latest and greatest technology into their products, I'm just pointing out practical reasons why they may not have done so in this case.


----------



## jrista (Dec 4, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Canon HAS the technology (they just aren't utilizing it),
> ...



I'm not talking about an Exmor-like sensor. I just mean the 70D DPAF sensor, which was basically made in heaven for the EOS-M line. I would use an EOS-M for casual photography and video (if it had some decent lenses to go along with it). For that, I don't even need a viewfinder, the live view screen would work. 



Marsu42 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > and I am truly loath to buy an A7r.
> ...



Well, don't forget that you can tack the EF adapter onto an EOS-M, and your entire collection of EF lenses will work with it. Technically, there is no reason that wouldn't work with an A7r, however from the reports I've heard, AF is excruciatingly slow if you do that (where as, I've heard AF works just as well with the EF adapter on EOS-M as with EOS-M native lenses.)

I favor Canon because when you buy into a brand, you buy into their ecosystem...and years ago I chose Canon. Doesn't really matter if it is Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, etc. You pick a brand, not necessarily a camera...unless you are the type who is willing to spend exorbitant amounts of money replicating the same lens for multiple brands (or are simply independently wealthy.)


----------



## jrista (Dec 4, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not saying that Canon needs to dump the 18mp sensor because of external competition. I'm saying they need to dump it because they themselves already have better technology, and *there is absolutely no reason not to utilize the 20mp DPAF sensor in the EOS-M2*. I don't believe it would cannibalize 70D sales at all...different class of camera.
> ...



Sure, there are certainly practical reasons...however that doesn't mean the opposite isn't true. There could be practical reasons for them to put the 70D DPAF sensor in the EOS-M line. As I said, EOS-M in the USA is a weird bird...its market positioning and technical specifications are at odds with the market. It certainly seems to me that there is plenty of interest in a mirrorless camera from Canon. EOS-M COULD be that camera...however it is simply positioned entirely wrong for the market here. I am saying...Canon has the technology, and more than enough capability, to reposition and market the EOS-M to US buyers, such that they would be completely satisfied with and even eager to buy the thing. I also don't believe that the 70D sensor is too complicated to manufacture...especially if its designed on their tried and true fabrication process (which given the known facts about Canon's manufacturing capacity, it would have to be.) 

Anyway...EOS-M isn't a compelling product in the competitive US marketplace, but it could be, and it really wouldn't take all that much effort on Canon's part to make it so. The thing that confuses me is, instead of even trying...they drop it from our market? Strange. Very strange, and disappointing.


----------



## EchoLocation (Dec 5, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not saying that Canon needs to dump the 18mp sensor because of external competition. I'm saying they need to dump it because they themselves already have better technology, and *there is absolutely no reason not to utilize the 20mp DPAF sensor in the EOS-M2*. I don't believe it would cannibalize 70D sales at all...different class of camera.
> ...


Neuro, come on.... are you really still standing up for Canon and their 18mp sensor?
I was in to DSLR's for about 5 years(not anymore, just got my a7!) and during that entire 4 year span of time Canon released many new APS-C cameras from the 7D to the T2i, to the 60D, etc, etc, etc...
To suggest that Canon use a different sensor is not to demand that they put their latest and greatest of everything in to every camera release. It's simply to suggest that if we are expected to care about a new release, maybe they should do something a little different. Just slapping a new badge and Wifi in something, and calling it a new release is not enough to get me excited. yes, it has kept Canon as the leader in DSLR sales.
But in the eyes of many, Canon is as dull as can be at this point. 
I'm done with buying DSLR's. Unless they make one the size of the a7, I will never buy one again. I think many people feel the same. In the 5 years I've been following camera releases, I cant think of any cameras Canon has released that have been really exciting at launch. 
In fact, I declined to purchase a refurb 7D in 2011 because I thought it was old(bought a 5DC instead)... now we're at the doorstep of 2014 and we're still in the same place. 
At this point, Canon is simply resting on their laurels. They are the market leader and they can sell tons of DSLR's to the masses. 
I used to be a big Canon fan, but at this point, there is nothing to be a fan of. I'm tired of DSLR's. What more can they do besides the 5DIII? They are already wayyy too big for serious traveling.
Now Canon simply doesn't release their newer, different products in the US? Ok, so it's just an incremental upgrade, but if so, why didn't they release this camera in June, and a high end M2x now with a viewfinder, flash, and a more pro like feel with better controls.

And please, don't tell me if I want a pro like camera with all the knobs and controls I NEED a DSLR. this is simply not true. I am 6'2" 200lbs, and my a7 fits great in my hands and has a shutter speed, aperture, and ISO dials along with TONS of programmable buttons.
DSLR's are not the future of photography, only the future of professional photography. In the future, people like my mom, aunts, and cousins, all of whom own DSLR's now, will simply buy mirrorless. In fact, most of them are already jealous of the advantages(mostly size) my a7 has over their DSLR's. They are quickly learning that DSLR's are no longer the ticket to the best image quality and they are happy to switch to something smaller and more fun.
Canon should do something to create some excitement and show their willingness to expand beyond DSLR's. Releasing another 18mp sensor that wont be available in the US is doing nothing to do so.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 5, 2013)

EchoLocation said:


> Neuro, come on.... are you really still standing up for Canon and their 18mp sensor?



Whether I'm standing up for it or not is as irrelevant as whether you're bashing it or not, because as you stated:



EchoLocation said:


> ...they can sell tons of DSLR's to the masses.


----------



## zlatko (Dec 5, 2013)

EchoLocation said:


> Neuro, come on.... are you really still standing up for Canon and their 18mp sensor?


Back when the original 12 megapixel 5D was introduced, a very experienced wedding photographer bought it and soon returned it. He told me it had "too many megapixels". He realized he had no need for 12mp and didn't want to deal with the big files. Now we think the little EOS M2 should have more than 18mp. People who buy the little M2 will be making really, really big prints.


----------



## jrista (Dec 5, 2013)

zlatko said:


> EchoLocation said:
> 
> 
> > Neuro, come on.... are you really still standing up for Canon and their 18mp sensor?
> ...



Or, downsampling to get less noisy photos with much sharper detail. Or to crop out a portion of the frame at higher detail. The value of having more pixels isn't purely to print large.


----------



## zlatko (Dec 5, 2013)

jrista said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > EchoLocation said:
> ...



Yes, it has value. But the manufacturer has to make a rational decision in prioritizing goals for the little M2. For the typical buyer of the M2, 18mp will be plenty. I know of two wedding photographers who _always_ shoot their 5D3 at the 10mp medium RAW setting. Fuji mirrorless X cameras are 16mp. Olympus mirrorless cameras are 16mp. Panasonic mirrorless cameras are 16mp. While 18mp isn't enough for everyone, it's clearly enough for a lot of camera buyers, including the likely M2 customer.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 5, 2013)

zlatko said:


> He realized he had no need for 12mp and didn't want to deal with the big files.



The whole IT side seems to evolve in unison, 12mp then regarding storage space and required processing power is about 20mp now for the same amount of money. In a couple of years it'll be 40mp with no downside, just like your good ol' youtube clip then was 10mb 240p and now it's 500mb 1080p with really no one noticing a drawback.



zlatko said:



> I know of two wedding photographers who _always_ shoot their 5D3 at the 10mp medium RAW setting.



*Always*? Well, I admit that's a bit strange, I understand it for bulk reception shots but for the few select ones I'd expect anyone to go for the full resolution. Plus nowadays you can downsample raw with the Adobe DNG Converter to reduced resolution lossy dng which gives you a lot of flexibility with little storage space, admittedly at the time cost of converting cr2->dng.


----------



## EchoLocation (Dec 5, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > EchoLocation said:
> ...


yes,
just because something is popular does not meant it is good. 5 years ago I certainly would've recommended buying a Canon camera... These days, not so much.
I'm here to talk about things I like, things i'm in interested in. I wish Canon had an a7 competitor to discuss with you guys here, but they simply don't.
Just because something is popular does not mean it's good.
look at bieber.


----------



## EchoLocation (Dec 5, 2013)

zlatko said:


> EchoLocation said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


BTW, my problem with the 18mp sensor has absolutely nothing to do with the number. I think it is pretty much the perfect amount of Megapixels for my needs... I just bought the a7(not the a7r.)
I just think at this point Canon needs to do something to get over this hump with their 18mp sensor... buy them from Sony, figure out some new technology, do something... 
From the 7D in 2009 to yesterdays EOS-M2 release, there has been very little innovation in the Canon world recently.


jrista said:


> EOS-M isn't a compelling product in the competitive US marketplace, but it could be, and it really wouldn't take all that much effort on Canon's part to make it so. The thing that confuses me is, instead of even trying...they drop it from our market? Strange. Very strange, and disappointing.


This is the part that is strange. Why don't they make a competetive product? Ok, the M was late to the party... but now they just quit? The M isn't a new release, couldn't they get an M2 to the US market before the holidays this year? My only guess is a more upgraded M will be released in the US sometime next year... I just cant get why it isn't available yet?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 5, 2013)

dilbert said:


> But he, like myself, will no longer be recommending Canon cameras to "the masses" that ask us for advice on which digital camera to buy. Multiplier effect.



All two of you, huh? I bet that has Canon executives quaking in there dress shoes. I'm sure they're just terrified that the two of you, and however many people you talk to (and that actually believe you), are going to outweigh all of those Canon cameras "the masses" see being used every day by wedding photographers, sports photographers, their friends, etc. Inflated sense of self importance, anyone?

Back on topic, the the EOS M is currently selling quite cheaply in the USA. Meanwhile, Canon USA is running a major television ad campaign for the somewhat more expensive Rebel SL1, "The world's smallest dSLR." That may be part of the reason for Canon USA's lack of interest in bringing out a new M at this time.


----------



## sdsr (Dec 5, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> People no longer buy gear that just does enough..
> We buy new cameras and of course expect to have new tech inside, regardless if we need it or not or if the old tech works as well..that's no longer the point.
> It's all about innovation and keeping up with the times. when another company releases something new, it will most definitely be something "new" worth upgrading to. Canon seems to be the only one releasing new models using old tech and not changing much else.
> We just feel short changed that's all..it's not because we need the new tech..it's because we're paying for something new, we'd want something new.



But the "we" you're referring to is a group of people who chat about this sort of thing in forums like this. Canon's "new models using old tech", at least in their dslrs, are still outselling everyone else, even if "we" don't think they deserve to; and even then, "we" tend to be awfully fond of Canon's lenses, especially the newer ones; and those lenses work best on Canon bodies, so.... 

I've been using my 6D less since buying a 5DIII and OM-D, so I took the 6D on a short trip the other day with nothing but the 24-105L (the other half took the OM-D) and ended up, unexpectedly at a museum which was very dark inside and followed that with a brief visit to another after dark which happened to be very photogenic from the outside. The camera performed flawlessly (I wasn't trying to photograph "herons catching fish") and although most of the resulting images were ISO 6400, the only time I applied any noise reduction afterwards was a couple of shots with a lot of dark sky, and they didn't really need it anyway. I dare say new tech could conjure up something even better, but for my purposes at least I don't know of anything currently available from other companies that would perform any better. That's just me, of course, but I suspect the that number of people out in the real world who find current gear to be inadequate is a rather small "we" that doesn't have all that much influence on the market. (Although not in the same class, the OM-D did very well too, by the way; I - perhaps unnecessarily - set its max ISO to 1600, but with Olympus's good fast lenses and excellent IBIS it didn't need to go higher.)


----------



## sdsr (Dec 5, 2013)

Well considering that you are in an EOS M thread I think it is safe to assume that many of us posting here _are_ in the market for a mirrorless system and are very dissapointed with the way things look to be turning out for the M. 
I am not one of those with a limitless supply of funds for camera/gear. I have 2 little ones in daycare and a wife that doesn't accept financial tomfoolery, as I don't either. I absolutely love my M and credit purchasing this awesome little camera with getting me back into my first, and most intense hobby. I love this system for a number of reasons, first and foremost being the size and portability of it. I hike and ride extensively and this has just fit right in. But I chose the M for 2 reasons: I had been with Canon for about 10 years with a 20D and then a 40D, and because of the firesale price. I felt loyal to Canon because, even though I didn't use them very much, I really loved those to cameras. As for the price of the M, I concede that to complain and whine when I bought it at bargain basement price is a littly petty, but since getting the kit I’ve purchased the other two lenses, flash and filters. I have-what I consider to be-a sizeable investment in the Canon version of the mirror less system now. I was really looking forward to a version of the M that would have been more in line with the OMD EM1/5, EP-5 or GX7. Now it's looking very sketchy that we will EVER see that from Canon. 

So yes, it pisses me off because now I feel like I've been marginalized by Canon because of my geographic location. Secondly, I am REALLY not interested in selling off all my stuff at probably half or, if I'm lucky, 2/3rds what I paid for it just to get me about 2/3rds the way there to an EP-5, or GX7. 

And before I get flamed I'll also acknowledge that in the big scheme of things this is not a big deal. But in my little photography world that I live in on the weekends...this is supremely frustrating hahahahaha...
[/quote]

Your post makes perfect sense. I'm not trying to say you're wrong, but I'll just point out a couple of things. First I'm not sure how much you would end up losing if you sold your M gear. I bought mine in the first fire sale - not as much as yours, though (body + flash + 22mm + 18-55) - didn't like it and sold it a couple of months later on ebay for more than I paid for it all (good timing, perhaps - the first fire sale had just ended). Second, yesterday amazon's "gold box" camera was an Olympus M43 E-PM2 (same excellent sensor as the OM-D EM5, but no EVF); you could buy it + two kit lenses (the equivalent of 28-84mm & 90-300) for $349.... 

(I also feel inclined to note that while it is, of course, possible to buy from Japan, if enough of us do that it will only reinforce the impression that mirrorless cameras don't sell in the US, thereby continuing the problem!)


----------



## Proffarm (Dec 5, 2013)

sdsr said:


> Well considering that you are in an EOS M thread I think it is safe to assume that many of us posting here _are_ in the market for a mirrorless system and are very dissapointed with the way things look to be turning out for the M.
> I am not one of those with a limitless supply of funds for camera/gear. I have 2 little ones in daycare and a wife that doesn't accept financial tomfoolery, as I don't either. I absolutely love my M and credit purchasing this awesome little camera with getting me back into my first, and most intense hobby. I love this system for a number of reasons, first and foremost being the size and portability of it. I hike and ride extensively and this has just fit right in. But I chose the M for 2 reasons: I had been with Canon for about 10 years with a 20D and then a 40D, and because of the firesale price. I felt loyal to Canon because, even though I didn't use them very much, I really loved those to cameras. As for the price of the M, I concede that to complain and whine when I bought it at bargain basement price is a littly petty, but since getting the kit I’ve purchased the other two lenses, flash and filters. I have-what I consider to be-a sizeable investment in the Canon version of the mirror less system now. I was really looking forward to a version of the M that would have been more in line with the OMD EM1/5, EP-5 or GX7. Now it's looking very sketchy that we will EVER see that from Canon.
> 
> So yes, it pisses me off because now I feel like I've been marginalized by Canon because of my geographic location. Secondly, I am REALLY not interested in selling off all my stuff at probably half or, if I'm lucky, 2/3rds what I paid for it just to get me about 2/3rds the way there to an EP-5, or GX7.
> ...



_Your post makes perfect sense. I'm not trying to say you're wrong, but I'll just point out a couple of things. First I'm not sure how much you would end up losing if you sold your M gear. I bought mine in the first fire sale - not as much as yours, though (body + flash + 22mm + 18-55) - didn't like it and sold it a couple of months later on ebay for more than I paid for it all (good timing, perhaps - the first fire sale had just ended). Second, yesterday amazon's "gold box" camera was an Olympus M43 E-PM2 (same excellent sensor as the OM-D EM5, but no EVF); you could buy it + two kit lenses (the equivalent of 28-84mm & 90-300) for $349.... 

(I also feel inclined to note that while it is, of course, possible to buy from Japan, if enough of us do that it will only reinforce the impression that mirrorless cameras don't sell in the US, thereby continuing the problem!)
[/quote]_


The thing is, right before the fire sale in July I had pretty much decided on the EP-5 (Olympus). I was going to wait for a bit to see the price drop on it, then on the way home from work I saw the M at 299.99 with the 22mm and said to myself 'For that price I'm a fool if I dont pick this up...' 

I was all excited because I thought that I had just bought myself into this system mega cheap and that Canon would come through in the next year with their version of the EP-5 or whatever and all I'd have to do is get the body...

Yeah, so Canon basically has me by the ***** at this point. I'm not gonna jump ship and run the risk of them actually releasing the high end M that we are hoping for.. Unless all of next year goes by and they don't show any movement in that direction.


----------



## Triggyman (Dec 5, 2013)

Proffarm said:


> sdsr said:
> 
> 
> > Well considering that you are in an EOS M thread I think it is safe to assume that many of us posting here _are_ in the market for a mirrorless system and are very dissapointed with the way things look to be turning out for the M.
> ...





The thing is, right before the fire sale in July I had pretty much decided on the EP-5 (Olympus). I was going to wait for a bit to see the price drop on it, then on the way home from work I saw the M at 299.99 with the 22mm and said to myself 'For that price I'm a fool if I dont pick this up...' 

I was all excited because I thought that I had just bought myself into this system mega cheap and that Canon would come through in the next year with their version of the EP-5 or whatever and all I'd have to do is get the body...

Yeah, so Canon basically has me by the ***** at this point. I'm not gonna jump ship and run the risk of them actually releasing the high end M that we are hoping for.. Unless all of next year goes by and they don't show any movement in that direction.
[/quote]

The same thing happened to me yesterday - I got the kit (18-55) with flash that I ordered for $288, but won't put any more money to the little thing, just maybe an extra battery and that's it. I see there's nothing to look forward to for the system in North America at least.

EOS-M fits my needs for a smaller camera that's not entirely a P&S (bought the elph100 with less than desired IQ and wasn;t happy about it), but with IQ that's about the same as my old 60D that I can walk around and don't mind being snatched away from me  Well depends on every person I guess.


----------



## Proffarm (Dec 5, 2013)

After reading the various threads here for the past few months, and especially this current thread I think I’ve come to a conclusion about the EOS M. Now, this is just my crackpot theory, but here me out..
I think all of the posters that say that there IS NOT a market for the M (and mirrorless cameras in general) have it wrong. I think that there is a MASSIVE market here in the U.S. for this type of system, and I think Canon knows it. Unfortunately, the consumers in this market don’t know it yet-and that is the problem. 

Short background. 
I love photography, and I have for the past 20 years or so. I’ve had a lot of point and shoots, and my first ‘big’ camera (SLR) was a Nikon D70. Then I went to Canon with a 20D then a 40D-and I never used them. They were too big, too obtrusive and distracting. I felt like they took ME out of the moment and I didn’t like that. The problem I faced was that I wanted something with a lot of the capabilities of ILC, but without the bulk and the price. I wanted great looking pictures without looking like some creepy guy on the street with a big camera. Then on a search one day, about 1.5 years ago I found the ‘M’ and I KNEW that this was what I had been looking for. That led me to research all the different brands and their various incarnations. I fell in love instantly with the idea of the small, mirrorless system that has many of the chops of the big boy DSLR’s. So I waited and bought the M when it went on sale and the rest is history. My wife is jealous of that camera…

Anyway, back to the theory.. Assume that there are actually a fair number of consumers here in the U.S. (the market) that want something MORE than their point and shoots/phones. They found while playing with their cell phones that this little thing called photography is pretty fun and cool, and now they want the next step. So in they walk to Best Buy, Walmart, Target or whatever giant retailer because honestly, they have no other choice since dedicated photog retailers are pretty much dead. They tell the salesman that they want something cool that does more than a point and shoot. The salesman does what? He points to the low-end DSLR’s (the Rebels and the Nikon versions) and hawks the bargain basement kit at them for 500-800 bucks. He tells them that THIS is what they are looking for and that THIS is what will give them the pictures they want. The customer thinks to themselves, ‘Ok, but that is kind of bigger than what I wanted to be holding, but yeah, I’ll try it?’ and buys the Rebel. They get home, they play with it and realize quickly that it intimidates them, and it makes them kind of stick out whenever they take it anywhere-and that might make them feel uncomfortable. Now the DSLR sits on the desk collecting dust. 

What if there was an alternative that was a little bigger than a point and shoot, but definitely smaller than a DSLR? You can’t possibly tell me that people WOULDN’T WANT THAT. No way. But Canon doesn’t want them to want it because it could potentially cut huge swaths of red into their big boy DSLR lines.. No way, says Canon. We WANT them to want the DSLR lines that are cemented in retail concrete that we’ve spent so many years developing and solidifying. Don’t even give them a choice, because it could really gut our bottom line. 
I never saw one commercial for the M. Not one. The other companies have probably seen the writing on the wall with Canon dominance over the DSLR market and realized they have to come up with something new or else fade away. 

Seriously, what average consumer that wants to jump into the cool world of photography wouldn’t want something half as big, and in many cases significantly cheaper than a DSLR? 

Alright guys, now come at me and tell me how wrong I am.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 5, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



I believe you. But even if you're having that conversation with a few people or a few dozen, you're not conversing with hundreds or thousands of people, and it would take hundreds _of_ thousands to make the sort of impact you're implying you are having. 

The point is, I bet for every person to whom you recommend against choosing Canon, there are several people recommending the opposite to _their_ co-workers or friends or family. For the most part, people tend to recommend what they use…and more people use Canon that the other brands.



dilbert said:


> Actually, I think you've missed the point that they are putting their latest sensor technology into cameras but that they've focused on R&D into sensors that have new features rather than new sensors with more megapixels or higher IQ.



No, I haven't missed the point. But I think perhaps you've missed the point that Canon has focused their sensor R&D in areas that they think customers will impact customer buying decisions, and low ISO DR isn't one of those.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 5, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> No, I haven't missed the point. But I think perhaps you've missed the point that Canon has focused their sensor R&D in areas that they think customers will impact customer buying decisions, and low ISO DR isn't one of those.



I really don't want to intervene in the entertaining dilbert & neuro talk , but I'd like to add that even if Canon would consider low iso important, they have no hope on reaching or overtaking Nikon/Sony in this area due to patents, so it's smart to stop trying and expand their own strengths - which unfortunately seems to be amateur video and high-end sports/tele.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 5, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > No, I haven't missed the point. But I think perhaps you've missed the point that Canon has focused their sensor R&D in areas that they think customers will impact customer buying decisions, and low ISO DR isn't one of those.
> ...



"No hope?" I wouldn't say that… If nothing else, Sony has IP and runs in the red, Canon has deep pockets, and there's this thing called licensing…


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 5, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon has deep pockets, and there's this thing called licensing…



Indeed, but it seems Canon execs would rather drop dead than to license IP, for example they programmed their own operating system (DryOS) rather than license an existing real time os. But of course I don't know what non-Canon IP already is in my cameras, and I surely would love to see them license exmor ... but Sony would have to be really desperate to give away one of their most exposed tech advantage, wouldn't they?


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 5, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Canon has deep pockets, and there's this thing called licensing…
> ...



That is also *assuming* that Sony would license it to Canon. If they license the technology, what advantage does SoNikon have?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 5, 2013)

Random Orbits said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Even before that, one has to assume that Canon would want to broach the idea in the first place. As I've said repeatedly, the evidence indicates that a bit less DR at low ISO is not hurting Canon's sales at all.


----------



## eml58 (Dec 6, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The point is, I bet for every person to whom you recommend against choosing Canon, there are several people recommending the opposite to _their_ co-workers or friends or family. For the most part, people tend to recommend what they use…and more people use Canon that the other brands.



And among all the possible scenarios we see here on CR, this is the one irrefutable piece of info, it's irrefutable not because some at CR say so (although we do, repeatedly), it's irrefutable because Canon, for 10 years ?? (Neuro, need help), have continuously been the largest seller of Cameras on the Planet, by a decent margin.

It could be because they make Garbage and have a supreme Marketing team that's able to sell Ice Makers to Eskimos, but....... I don't think so, it may just be that Canon make an excellent group of products (not saying in all areas the best, just excellent), have first class support, and are smart enough to paint their large Lenses....white.


----------



## Woody (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > No, I haven't missed the point. But I think perhaps you've missed the point that Canon has focused their sensor R&D in areas that they think customers will impact customer buying decisions, and low ISO DR isn't one of those.
> ...



I think Canon marketing department is doing a great job (certainly better than Sony/Olympus/Panasonic in this regard) and clearly know how to expand their products in different regions in the world at the appropriate time. That is why their market shares for interchangeable lens cameras has not changed significantly over the years.

However, in maturing markets such as the USA, their inability to match the sensor performance of their competitors is hurting them. A couple of years ago, 8 out of 10 DSLRs sold in the USA carry the Canon logo... now, they are down to 6 out of 10. This is because most folks can no longer strongly recommend Canon to their friends and family. I am sure most folks do not need wide dynamic range at low ISO 90% of the time, but if the competition (i.e., Nikon) can offer this capability at the same price, what's stopping them from buying Nikon? IMO, the SL1/100D is a SUPERB entry level DSLR, but it is clearly not dominating the sales charts like the DRebel or DRebel XT. I believe poor word of mouth has something to do with it.

Personally, I am quite happy with my Canon DSLRs but I won't be upgrading them in the next few years unless Canon is able to make significant progress in their sensor imaging capabilities. Neither will I recommend Canon to friends and family. For compact cameras, I'll go for Sony RX100. For mirrorless, probably Fuji or Olympus. For DSLRs, Nikon. Nothing from Canon is compelling.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2013)

Woody said:


> A couple of years ago, 8 out of 10 DSLRs sold in the USA carry the Canon logo... now, they are down to 6 out of 10.



Interesting. Would you mind providing your source for those data? Thanks!


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > A couple of years ago, 8 out of 10 DSLRs sold in the USA carry the Canon logo... now, they are down to 6 out of 10.
> ...



Ditto.


----------



## zlatko (Dec 6, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> ... but I'd like to add that even if Canon would consider low iso important, they have no hope on reaching or overtaking Nikon/Sony in this area due to patents, so it's smart to stop trying and expand their own strengths - which unfortunately seems to be amateur video and high-end sports/tele.



... or _very_ fortunately for people who happen to do amateur video and high-end sports/tele. And very fortunately for people who photograph weddings. I just read a comment on Facebook from a Nikon using pro asking whether the skin tones from the new Df were like those from the D4, because the skin tones from his D4 were giving him problems. I've seen dozens of Canon DSLRs (and bags full of Canon lenses) used by wedding videographers in recent years, and never once a Nikon or Sony.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> ... but I'd like to add that even if Canon would consider low iso important, they have no hope on reaching or overtaking Nikon/Sony in this area due to patents, so it's smart to stop trying and expand their own strengths - which unfortunately seems to be amateur video and high-end sports/tele.



I wouldn't say that is necessarily true. Canon's problem is their ADC and other downstream electronics, which exist off-die, operate at high frequency, and are only moderately parallelized. The direct readout from the sensor is usually pretty clean. It is when the downstream secondary amplifier kicks in, and when ADC occurs in the DIGIC chips, that the bulk of read noise is introduced.

I think Canon sensors are actually very good technology...they simply lack the image processing integration and digital readout that Sony Exmor has (the ADCs are hyperparallelized and on the sensor die). That said, when Canon published the press release about 120mp APS-H sensor, it clearly described some kind of on-die parallel "image processing" that sounded very much like Sony's Exmor. I don't recall anything about fully digital readout (i.e. with digital CDS and digital amplification), but Canon had to move the ADC on-die, and greatly increase it's parallelization, in order to achieve the 9.5fps readout of that monster volume of pixel data. They also have patents on that sensor.

So, while Canon likely won't create something that works exactly the same way as Exmor, they already have technology that is very similar in design...


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



I know a few dozen wedding, event, and portrait photographers. Two use a pair of D3, one uses a D3 and a D800 (his work is phenomenal, he LOVES the D800+14-24, but he still caters to the D3). Two use the D7000 (I think one upgraded to a D7100.) The rest use Canon 5D II and 5D III (many usually have a backup as well, sometimes its a 5D III + old 5D II, sometimes it is two 5D III bodies.) I know a few wedding and portrait photogs who use a 1D X + 5D III. A couple also use the 5D II/III + 7D as their backup. The most talked about is the 5D III, usually for one key feature: The quiet shooting mode!

Without question, particularly for weddings, the 5D line is the most frequently used camera amongst the people I know and know of. The 5D II might actually be the most ubiquitous wedding and portraiture camera I've encountered, at least here in Colorado. That goes for amateurs as well, and a few young budding wedding photographers (in their very late teens in some cases!) who show phenomenal skill and probably have rich careers ahead of them. Their gear is most often the 5D II + 24-70/2.8L + 70-200/2.8 L, with the 50/1.2L, 85/1.4L and 135/2 L filling in fairly frequently as well.

Given my experience, friends, and acquaintances (and the fact that I've moderated photo.stackexchange.com since 2010), the notion that "amateur wedding photographers" use APS-C Canon DSLRs is pure conjecture. The 5D II+70-200 seems to have become the amateur wedding photographer kit of choice, and given the excellent price/quality ratio of those two, it's no wonder why.


----------



## unfocused (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Woody said:
> ...



Totally meaningless. Here is what "top camera" search results means according the dpreview: "Cameras receiving the most clicks in reviews and specs in the last five days." 

Newly released cameras are always going to generate the most clicks on a review site. There is no relationship to the number of people reading a review to the sales of a camera.

Use the Amazon best sellers list. As of tonight, Canon has 13 of the top 20 best sellers. Nikon has 7. 

What continues to amaze me is that the 5DIII consistently holds a slot in the top 10 against cameras that cost a fraction of what it costs. In fact the body only comes in at #9 and the body with lens is at #18. (The 6D kit is at #10 and the 6D body #13) There are not any full-frame Nikon bodies in the top 20.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

unfocused said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Is Sony even in the top 20 at all?


----------



## unfocused (Dec 6, 2013)

jrista said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



No, but it's a little bit hard to get a fair comparison because the new Sony's aren't DSLRs so they are in a different category.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

unfocused said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



True, but Sony also has DSLR cameras... I know a couple people who absolutely swear by them, one of them is a pretty good Colorado landscape photographer. But they always seem to be a minority, despite Sony's technologically superior sensors.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> A different but similarly interesting data point is the "top camera" search results on www.dpreview.com on their front page.
> 
> It used to be that Canon cameras were 6 out of 10 for a long while. Now Canon is 3 out of 10 and none in the top 5.



Sorry, dilbert not interesting nor even useful data. As unfocused stated, it's meaningless. 



unfocused said:


> Use the Amazon best sellers list. As of tonight, Canon has 13 of the top 20 best sellers. Nikon has 7.
> 
> What continues to amaze me is that the 5DIII consistently holds a slot in the top 10 against cameras that cost a fraction of what it costs. In fact the body only comes in at #9 and the body with lens is at #18. (The 6D kit is at #10 and the 6D body #13) There are not any full-frame Nikon bodies in the top 20.



If you want another interesting 'top 100' list, look at what Amazon buyers think of the products they've purchased. Check their Top 100 *Rated* dSLRs list. The top 14 are all Canon, only 3 Nikon in the top 20 (and all three are D3100/kits). Dilbert, care to count the number of coworkers and friends to whom you 'can't recommend Canon', and compare that to the number of positive recommendations that Canon buyers took the time to post, that result in Canon dominating that list? 

The awesome low ISO IQ, high resolution, astounding DR, and higher-than-any-other-dSLR DxOMark Sensor Score of the Nikon D800E have earned it the impressive rank of *#76* on that list (only 14 spots _behind_ the poor DR, horrible banding in the shadows 5DII). The D800 and D600/D610? Nowhere to be found (although the D700 is on there...barely, at #98).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> What you don't see on Amazon is the buying habits of people outside the USA.



As opposed to the dpreview 'data' you provided, which doesn't show anyone buying anything anywhere.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> No, it shows what cameras people are interested in. People are no longer as interested in looking at or reading about Canon cameras as they used to be.



At least for the past five days. :

Based on data from Canon and Nikon themselves, people are *buying* more Canon dSLRs. If 'interest' doesn't translate to sales, who cares (well, we all know _you_ do, at least as long as Canon is ranked lower on some sort of list, somewhere on the Internet).


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Interested in in a five day span of time. Canon hasn't released anything in the last five days...so why would they be in that DPR list? When Canon releases something, especially something big, people will show interest.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> > Based on data from Canon and Nikon themselves, people are *buying* more Canon dSLRs. If 'interest' doesn't translate to sales, who cares (well, we all know _you_ do, at least as long as Canon is ranked lower on some sort of list, somewhere on the Internet).
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is, we don't know what the sales data is for any website other than Amazon and not everyone buys from or through Amazon.



Try reading Canon's and Nikon's quarterly reports, or if that's too difficult, just read that part in red one more time.


----------



## Woody (Dec 6, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Use the Amazon best sellers list. As of tonight, Canon has 13 of the top 20 best sellers. Nikon has 7.



Yes, that's where I normally visit for a rough gauge of interest level. And I usually take a peek once a week. Same goes for DPReview/Imaging Resource most-clicked cameras and BCNRanking.

All indicators show one CONSISTENT trend: dropping level of interest in Canon DSLRs. Point of reference? Just a couple of years ago, Canon DSLRs used to hog the various charts. Amazon bestselling DSLRs, BCNRanking, DPReview/Imaging Resource most clicked cameras etc etc. Even newly released cameras have great difficulties in dislodging the Canon DRebel or DRebel XT from the top of the most-clicked camera lists on DPReview/Imaging Resource.

It's true that Canon has not lost its lead in worldwide market shares for interchangeable cameras. But if the above trend persists and starts to grow in other parts of the world, Canon will surely lose their lead to Nikon. It's already happening in some parts of the world...

This is not exactly a bad thing. Canon will be forced to make some drastic improvements instead of plodding slowly along...


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

Woody said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Use the Amazon best sellers list. As of tonight, Canon has 13 of the top 20 best sellers. Nikon has 7.
> ...



It was exactly a couple of years ago when Canon was paper releasing, or announcing the release of, the 5D III and 1D X. It is, therefor, not surprising that interest in Canon equipment began to peak around that time. Official releases came about a year later, which also coincides with peaking of interest in Canon equipment. 

Other brands release on different schedules. Nikon seems to be releasing something all the time. Sony has had a few compelling releases lately. Therefor, it is again no surprise that interest in those brands is peaking now, or has sustained a moderately higher level of interest lately.

Canon has not had any major releases lately. The announcement of a white paint job on a preexisting camera doesn't count as a major "release", or even a minor one...it's non-interesting outside of the initial scope of the announcement. When Canon releases a 7D II, or the big mp camera, interest will once again peak, those cameras will be reviewed, and tested, and compared and discussed at great length. IQ and DR and megapixels will all become the heart of heated debates day in and day out...probably for the span of a year. After that, people will lose interest...and get back to more productive things...like making photographs with the 7D II they so hotly debated. 

Brands of physical equipment exist in cyclical markets. They don't have the option of controversially eliminating discrete products and product releases in favor of perpetual improvement schemes for unreasonably priced, recurring, perpetual fees like Adobe and the rest of the software world. Every brand has it's ebb and flow, its peaks and luls, it's oscillations. Canon had their peak, and have entered a lul. They will have another peak in a year or two, and another, and another, ad inf.


----------



## Woody (Dec 6, 2013)

jrista said:


> Every brand has it's ebb and flow, its peaks and luls, it's oscillations. Canon had their peak, and have entered a lul. They will have another peak in a year or two, and another, and another, ad inf.



I know what you are saying and I wish that is the case, but clearly it is not. 

When the DRebel and XT were released, they stayed on top of bestselling and most-clicked camera charts for as long as they were available. That is not happening now. Clearly, the Nikon D7100 and D3200 are NOT new releases, but they are generating more interest than Canon 70D and 700D/100D.

Anyway, let's see how Canon responds in 2014. I'm hoping for more breakthrough (like dual pixel AF) and breathtaking (like the Sony 24 MP APS-C sensor) products. But at the moment, I just want to purchase the 50 f/1.8 IS and 16-50 f/4 IS as soon as they are announced.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

Woody said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Every brand has it's ebb and flow, its peaks and luls, it's oscillations. Canon had their peak, and have entered a lul. They will have another peak in a year or two, and another, and another, ad inf.
> ...



I totally agree about the D7100/D3200 vs. 70D/700D. I've mentioned it before, even in this thread...Canon's interim DSLR releases, as well as the EOS-M2, have lacked any "compelling" features. It's been that way for years...with yearly releases of Rebel cameras that differed in the most minute ways, all with "the same old damnable 18mp sensor", its to be expected that those cameras won't create a lot of interest. The 70D seems to have peaked interest with it's DPAF. (I'd also point out that it was only this year that Canon entry level DSLR sales started to level off or drop...so it isn't like this has been occurring for years...it is a VERY new development...and it is occuring alongside weak and weakening sales numbers for mirrorless cameras from Canon's competitors as well. There is clearly a significant market factor for this decline in sales, and I honestly don't think it has anything to do with competition or features...its fundamentally economic, particularly in Europe and the US, where the average wage for middle and upper middle class families has been plumeting, sucking up disposable income along with it, thanks to continued economic recession (people may be working, but they are working harder and earning far less on average.))

In general, though, I was thinking about Canon's major releases. The professional line, the xD series cameras. That is the true battleground, where the most significant and meaningful innovations are made, and which serve the most use. The xxxD and xxD lines from Canon, the Dxxxx and Dxxx lines from Nikon, and a number of Sony offerings fill the consumer niche. In that niche, every single camera on the market is leaps and bounds more capable than any novice or family photographer could possibly need. Competition in that segment seems almost moot.


----------



## Ruined (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert, are you trolling?

If not, one of the worst arguments I have ever read with most ridiculous "data" to back it up. lol.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Without wanting to be condescending, had you of been watching websites such as dpreview for longer then you'd know that Canon's "peak" was not short, rather it lasted some number of years, maybe even as many as 5 and that it spanned the entire gamut of Canon cameras.



So, dpreview suggests that more people are _looking_ at other brands more often now, but the sales data show that more people are still *buying* Canon. I guess that means they look at other brands, but don't like what they see… Judging by the ratings on Amazon.com, it seems that people who choose Canon are much happier with their purchases, as well.


----------



## unfocused (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> In the past, Canon was always well represented in the top 10 regardless of how recent the announcements were.



Is this something you keep data on, or is that just how you remember it? 

Because if it's just your memory, it's more likely to be selective. 

Look, the point that people consistently make here is that regardless of how a tiny fraction of tech-obsessed individuals may feel about what they perceive as Canon's "falling behind" their competition, there is zero evidence that this alleged technology gap has had any impact on sales. In fact, what evidence that is available points in exactly the opposite direction. 

Canon's domination of the full frame market is probably the most significant market development out there. I know you don't like the Amazon best sellers, but they are the world's largest retailer and there simply isn't any other comparable source available. I would love it if B&H, Adorama, Digital Rev and others would publish their sales rankings, but they don't. So we have to go with what is available (and recognize that it is consistent with the sales figures reported by Canon and Nikon).

I just checked a few minutes ago. Canon's 5DIII body and their 6D kit are in the top 10; the 6D body and the 5DIII kit are in the top 20. You have to drop down to #39 this morning to find a Nikon full frame on the list (the DF). It's absolutely front-page news that a camera body that lists for more than $3,000 can be outselling $500 cameras. And, it's equally newsworthy that they are significantly outselling a newly released, highly anticipated and much-hyped camera.

Being disappointed or frustrated with a company is perfectly fine (although one shouldn't take it to such extremes). But trying to extrapolate some sort of death spiral for the company from your personal frustration when all evidence points in the opposite direction isn't rational.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



You would need to back that up with actual data, because that is not what I remember.

I would also point out that currently, and for the last several days, the top four cameras on that list were all released recently, within the last few months. The average distribution of the rest is 2.3%. An average of 2.3% of searches are made for the top items on the list that are not very recently new cameras. Of ALL the cameras in the world, fully three are still Canon, and all were released some time ago. No matter how you slice it, Canon still has the majority representation on the DPR list. As they always have. Imagine how that list will look when Canon releases the 7D II. Imagine how it will look when the rumors about the 7D II start to get more solid. That major representation of 3/10 will jump...to 4/10, 5/10. When a major new camera from Canon hits the shelves, and people exit "waiting mode" and start evaluating which Canon camera to buy again, I'd bet Canon once again takes over the majority of that list...until the fervor dies out and people finish making their decisions. Then, well, then once again the list will be dominated by the most recent releases, from whatever brand is releasing.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



I think you're missing my point. I was referring to sales figures reported by Canon and Nikon themselves. My reference to Amazon wasn't about sales ranking, but their Top Rated dSLR list, based on customer reviews. I referred to that here:



neuroanatomist said:


> If you want another interesting 'top 100' list, look at what Amazon buyers think of the products they've purchased. Check their Top 100 *Rated* dSLRs list. The top 14 are all Canon, only 3 Nikon in the top 20 (and all three are D3100/kits). Dilbert, care to count the number of coworkers and friends to whom you 'can't recommend Canon', and compare that to the number of positive recommendations that Canon buyers took the time to post, that result in Canon dominating that list?
> 
> The awesome low ISO IQ, high resolution, astounding DR, and higher-than-any-other-dSLR DxOMark Sensor Score of the Nikon D800E have earned it the impressive rank of *#76* on that list (only 14 spots _behind_ the poor DR, horrible banding in the shadows 5DII). The D800 and D600/D610? Nowhere to be found (although the D700 is on there...barely, at #98).


----------



## jrista (Dec 7, 2013)

dilbert said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I just checked a few minutes ago. Canon's 5DIII body and their 6D kit are in the top 10; the 6D body and the 5DIII kit are in the top 20. You have to drop down to #39 this morning to find a Nikon full frame on the list (the DF). It's absolutely front-page news that a camera body that lists for more than $3,000 can be outselling $500 cameras. And, it's equally newsworthy that they are significantly outselling a newly released, highly anticipated and much-hyped camera.
> ...



It's another *option*. It's a catering tool. It helps them cater to a specific, and yes possibly more niche, group of photographers. Nikon needs to do something. They make great products, but they are missing something somewhere, and even after some two decades, they haven't been able to topple the Canon beast. I applaud Nikon for thinking outside the box, even if that means thinking backwards a bit. At least they are demonstrating an interest in an increasingly common request from true blue stills photographers who want a camera built specifically just for them, without "any of that video crap." 

I fully understand the request. I am not sure the request matters these days...R&D budgets aren't going to stop investing in video research, and creating a camera without the video features is actually probably less costly. Ironically, it seems to end up being a win/win in the end, possibly cheaper for the manufacturer to make, and more appealing to the most die-hard stills photographers.


----------



## jrista (Dec 7, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



"Digital cameras" is an extremely broad and diverse pool. Makes it difficult to determine what's occurring, and more specifically, WHY it is occurring. Global statistics have their use, but they don't make for good comparisons. It would be like putting out two baskets full of random fruit, sourced from a variety of locations, but each one sourced from different locations. Trying to determine why people are eating from one basket or the other is largely meaningless...you have no detail, only a single overarching result: Basket B was eaten from more than Basket A. That doesn't tell anyone anything, and isn't any better than comparing apples to oranges.


----------

