Canon EOS M

[Black Pearl]

Well boys and girls it might be about to happen:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/n...th-ef-m-mount/

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/0...sed-next-week/

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/20/c...possible-leak/

[arith]

Instead of a mirror why not silvered glass that is transparent when a current is applied, no shutter and pressurised body with a multiplier 1.0x permanently attached.

The pressure allows the camera to report it is weather sealed; or is this too far to go.

[rpcrowe]

I have mentioned this before but, there is no way that I would ever select a camera in which the lack of a proper eye-level viewfinder would force me to use an LCD viewfinder as my only way of viewing. IMO, liveview is a very inefficient way to shoot. If all digital cameras were set up like this, I would still be shooting film. However, if you can stand liveview as the only viewing method; I guess that this camera might be a bit better than a sharp poke in the eye...

[FrankMi]

LOL! You and I are in the same boat, Richard! Give me a real viewfinder any day!

[Scott Stephen]

Agreed. Without a viewfinder it is just an expensive i-phone. You would even have a hard time selling me on an electronic eye-piece viewfinder like on the Sonys, etc..

[jeeperman]

I too need a view finder, however Scott mentioned the Sony so I must pop in and say.....Scott, I felt the same way until the A77 came out. It is an OLED view finder and thus a different animal than ever seen before {first of it's kind}. Until you try it don't be so quick to judge as I was. Once I tried it out....i bought it. I am sure it is only a matter of time that Cannon and Nikon offer something similar and this may be the start.

The quaulity viewed is quite outstanding as it delivers an image that if not told...you would not know is not optical. Very high detail. Not to mention I get to see in real time what any of my adjustments do to my image. W/B, exposure comp or just playing with settings. Far fewer test shots and chimpimg. The highlights and shadows do not block up as in the previous models.
Just sayin.

Oh almost forgot, if I have live view on and bring the camera to eye, the cameras sensor knows it and swaps to the view finder and turns the screen off, then back on when removed from the eye.

[Scott Stephen]

@Jeeperman-
I have read good things about the Sonys. Though wary of the EVF, that may just be my own caution showing. I am impressed by the rest of the A-77, other than maybe the battery-life, which is impacted by having to power the EVF. With Sony making many (most?) of Nikon's sensors, they seem to be subtle-ly gaining on Canon and Nikon, and in a few years may well be clearly in the lead on these things.

[Black Pearl]

Actually Sony's market share is dropping rapidly. They did very well on the back of Minolta SLR users and managed to grab a good number of new users until they stopped making DSLR's and went entirely over to DSLT's.
I'll agree with Paul that the OVF in the A77 is very good but the 'bread & butter' models - the ones that get market share and snag new users ready for future upgrade - have awful, truely awful viewfinders. I had a chap in recently who had dropped his A350 (or similar) and wanted to replace it. He has built up a lovely kit of Sony and Minolta glass but he hated the OVF's in the A37 and A57.....the ones he could afford. He's away thinking about his future camera, not being able to shoot anything and will probably dump the lot on eBay and start over with Canon or Nikon. I really felt for him because I couldn't help, Sony have alienated millions of there current users and are loosing millions more.

[Black Pearl]

As to the EOS M not having an EVF then Canon have gone the way of the Nikon One, Panasonic GF and Sony NEX because they don't all have them but are selling by the bucket load.
I'm slightly disappointed because a bit of me wanted them to have the balls to take on the X-Pro 1 but really it was never going to happen. It's all about number so a small, consumer orientated camera with a Canon badge will fly off the shelves.

[thequacksoflife]

As to the EOS M not having an EVF then Canon have gone the way of the Nikon One, Panasonic GF and Sony NEX because they don't all have them but are selling by the bucket load.
I'm slightly disappointed because a bit of me wanted them to have the balls to take on the X-Pro 1 but really it was never going to happen. It's all about number so a small, consumer orientated camera with a Canon badge will fly off the shelves.

viewfinders always create a reaction. Richard and others make a big deal of it but if you are in London you'll see parties of Japanese tourists with mirrorless cameras and even when they have a viewfinder they use big screen on the back. I guess alot of this is when you started photography. Personally I'm in the viewfinder camp! although when I have a pancake prime on I do also use the screen

Robin, How does the Sony OVF in the a37/57 compare to the viewfinders in the G3 and the V1 or the add on one for the GX1?

I think/hope as Mirrorless "matures" we'll get a range of camera bodies. At the moment though you do wonder who they are aimed at. e.g Sony - great sensors and virtually all consumer lenses.

[Black Pearl]

The Panasonic and Nikon viewfinder are reasonable, probably no better than the Alpha ones but they are generally owned by people who have only ever had an EVF so are used to the compromises they can have. It's different with Sony because the vast majority of current owners are used to a OVF and want to continue using one - their beef is they no longer have the option.
I know why Sony have done it and I understand the advantages an EVF can bring to a camera, I actually prefer using the X100 in EVF mode, but as with the reaction above many photographers are not willing to change and now they are stuck with either keeping their current models or jumping ship. Neither is a good business plan if you're after market share and a profit to take to your bank.

[doomed forever]

i've seen the images yesterday and thought about it looks basically like a PowerShot S100, not too much different, except EF Mount & a big Sensor, possible APS-C. But what is really a mess for myself, no OVF, no EV Mode Dial on Top, no ISO Mode Dial, and it looks like a brick. No offence, but i'll go maybe next year with the Sony RX100, because it's way pocketable, so i don't have to carry my DSLR/Digicams, and the IQ is really nice for such a small Digicam, the 1" Sensor does it for my as "everyday with me" pocket-able Digicam. Alright, the RX100 also got a Display only. Too sad, i like the Fuji X10 Retrostyle very way much, and with a good OVF, even without markings inside or only 80 to 85% viewing angle - but it's too huge to put in a small pocket. The review on dpreview was way good for such a compact class digicam. Most important thing for myself, i don't buy any digicam if it can't shoot raw since 2002.

[thequacksoflife]

The Panasonic and Nikon viewfinder are reasonable, probably no better than the Alpha ones but they are generally owned by people who have only ever had an EVF so are used to the compromises they can have. It's different with Sony because the vast majority of current owners are used to a OVF and want to continue using one - their beef is they no longer have the option.
I know why Sony have done it and I understand the advantages an EVF can bring to a camera, I actually prefer using the X100 in EVF mode, but as with the reaction above many photographers are not willing to change and now they are stuck with either keeping their current models or jumping ship. Neither is a good business plan if you're after market share and a profit to take to your bank.

I must admit when i pick up the d300 the EVF's do look tunnel like. I guess though that eventually EVF will dominate. The one on the nex7/a77 is meant to be good..

I don't get Sony. All that full frame fuss a few years ago and now nothing....

[inkista]

i've seen the images yesterday and thought about it looks basically like a PowerShot S100, not too much different, except EF Mount

More like EF-compatible mount (with an adapter). There's an extra pin and the registration distance is obviously smaller than EOS. Proper mirrorless, not like the Pentax K-01, which sacrificed smaller size for K-mount compatibility.

& a big Sensor, possible APS-C.

Everyone says this but I'm looking at the filter size of the lens on there (43mm), and the proportions, I can't help thinking this is a G1-X sensor in it, not APS-C. I have a feeling most folks are misjudging the scale. (NEX lenses tend to have 49mm-67mm filter sizes. m4/3 go from 39mm-52mm). So maybe not APS-C, and only slightly bigger than four-thirds. This would then tier it below the entry-level dSLRs. To me, it looks a whole lot like an interchangeable lens G1-X, and there's probably no viewfinder, because the G-series OVF sucks beyond the telling of it, and no viewfinder is better than one that sucks. They're playing it safe and aiming at P&S folks who want a big sensor and interchangeable lenses, and are used to composing with an LCD. If this one does well, they can do a more upscale one with more prosumer features/controls and a viewfinder of some kind for us enthusiasts/SLR owners.

I don't see it as a fail, even though it doesn't appeal to me personally (aside from that Canon hotshoe and the possibility of full EXIF/autofocus compatibility with adapted EOS lenses--two sore points for me with m4/3 is wanting to rebuy flash gear I already own, and that I can't control the aperture on adapted EOS lenses), I think it's smart of them to be cautious and start with targeting the folks who want to own a G, but not an EOS camera. I also love that the first lens out of the gate is a fast normalish prime.

And if that camera has focus peaking, the lack of a viewfinder isn't going to stop folks who aren't planning on using their little camera for fast-action photography. I think it's a good start, but I won't be tempted to budge from m4/3 until the lenses are built out and there is a body with a viewfinder in it.

[thorondor]

Small body, large lens( I mean 18-55mm IS lens), cant see many external controls neither. Looks like a weak competitor from Canon, I am sure they didn't think much on it.

I found this size comparison by the way, comparing EOS M with panasonic LX-7, Canon G1X and Fuji X-Pro1 (not very precise though):

http://www.dslrpassion.com/news/36-c...omparison.html

[thequacksoflife]

I think it's a good start, but I won't be tempted to budge from m4/3 until the lenses are built out and there is a body with a viewfinder in it.

I wouldn't be tempted to budge even then..... the lens are there now for m4/3 - really nice set of primes and now a weather sealed body and a weather sealed f2.8 zoom.

[rpcrowe]

"Richard and others make a big deal of it but if you are in London you'll see parties of Japanese tourists with mirrorless cameras and even when they have a viewfinder they use big screen on the back."

Just because a bunch of Japanese tourists (or Chinese or you name the nationality for that matter) use cameras with LCD viewfinders doesn't make them a viable choice for a serious photographer, anymore than the billions of pictures shot by the Japanese/Chinese/you name the nationality tourists will be very good to excellent images.

I think that the popularity of LCD viwers is based on the inability of many photographers (I use that term loosely) to visualize a three dimensonal image (as seen in the camera's viewfinder) to a two dimensonal image (captured by the sensor). The LCD viewfinder translates the 3-D image to a 2-D rendition without the need for using the optional gray matter accessory located between the photographer's ears.

Viewing any LCD viewfinder in the bright light is problematic. Some LCD viewfinders are more efficient than others in bright light but, none that I have ever seen equal the eyelevel viewfinder with through the lens optical viewing.

Size of the image: one thing which will ALWAYS set a poor amateur image apart from a good image from an experienced photographer is the background and sides of the image. The amateur has tunnel vision and hones in on the subject. The experienced capable photographer looks all over the image to ensure that there is nothing that will interfere with the viewers attention to the principle subject... That means nothing "growing" out of the subjects head, no dogs making whoopie in the background, no parts of other people jutting into the frame from the sides, and many other distracting elements. It is very easy to scan the frame for distractions using an eye level viewfinder with the size of an object virtually the same as it would be when you viewed it with your naked eye.. Reduce those tiny subjects to a 3 inch LCD which is actually three inches on the diagonal. Everything that you see in this viewfinder is tiny (miniscule). And you are viewing it from 12" - 18" away from your eye.

Besides the image, my 7D viewfinder contains a lot of pertinent information. Here is an image of the eye level 7D viewfinder as the photographer sees it with his eye up against the camera:



The important information #'s 6-18 is extremely tiny on the LED. Too tiny to quickly read it at 12-18" away from my eye and in the glare of the sun.

The shutter lag when using an LCD viewfinder is far longer than when viewed through the eye level viewfinder. Shutter lag reduces expensive cameras to the performance of cheap P&S cameras.

Here is something that may not be pertinent for all photographers but, it certainly is for me. I can follow action better using an eye level viewfinder than with the LCD. Additionally, I can shoot hand held panos very easily when viewing with my eye level viewfinder. I am rotating the camera very close to its nodal point. Holding the camera a foot or more from my face makes shooting hand held panos difficult.

Finally, there is the pain involved with shooting using the LCD viewfinder. Acording to Page 377 of the User's Manual; "The photographer must bite his or her lip when pressing the shutter button!" This guy has obviously read his user's manual. "The harder one's lip is bitten the better the image captured"



When we bought a camera for my wife, she expressly wanted a camera with an LCD viewfinder. Oh yes, BTW, my darling wife is a crappy photographer and remains so after she got her new camera which has a nice LCD viewing capability.

Finally, it seems like there are very limited button contols on his camera. If I am correct, most adjustments will have to be made via the menu. That is a slow inefficient process and one that I hated on my first and very short lived, Rebel 350D.

[Colin Southern]

viewfinders always create a reaction. Richard and others make a big deal of it but if you are in London you'll see parties of Japanese tourists with mirrorless cameras and even when they have a viewfinder they use big screen on the back.

I'm not saying that EVF cameras don't have a place in the world, but I WOULD like to suggest that "Japanese tourists with mirrorless cameras" probably aren't producing the same quality of images that you, I, and Richard does.

I can't speak for others, but there is just no way I could shoot most of the things that I shoot without a viewfinder; camera stabilisation alone would be a nightmare.

[Black Pearl]

I've shot with eye level TTL optical viewfinders, I've shot with eye level optical range finders, I've shot with eye level electronic viewfinders, I've shot with waist level viewfinders, I've shot using ground glass screens with a ruddy great cloth over my head and I've shot with every shape, form and type of rear LCD - it doesn't make the hapeth of difference to me....I couldn't care less.

If pushed I'd admit to preferring a SLR style viewing system but I'd be a poor photographer if I limited my choice of camera to just that.

Rear screens allow shooting at the sorts of unusual angles that an eye level viewfinder simply can't do.
A waist level finder lets you view the image from a distance and that I find helps visualise the overall compositions in a way that looking through an eye level one simply can't do.
Using a ground glass screen on a 5x4 plate camera makes you think very hard, very long and with a great deal of care before you press the shutter. My 'keeper rate' when I had my MPP was far higher than with any other camera I have ever used.

You don't need a DSLR to take a great picture.
You don't need a raft of information in the whatever viewing system you are using to take a great picture.
You don't need to rigidly hold a camera up to your face to take a great picture.

What you do need is a creative eye, an artistic flair and an open mind....a bit of technical know-how will help from time to time but it won't always give a better image.

The best camera is the one you have with you - I don't alway have my D300s with me so it ain't always the best camera.

[thequacksoflife]

Colin/Richard - after I typed that I thought of Richard.... what I am saying is that that the camera makers are reacting to a trend there are many "photogprahers" (people who buy cameras ) who don't consider it an issue. The Japanese tour parties frankly could be the majority of people with a camera these days. Which is what prompted my "Japanese Tourist" comment.

Obviously a viewfinder is important to me as i've bought one for my GX1. I'm in the same camp as Robin the best camera is the camera you have with you. There are times when my d300 is not the right option and the GX1 is, and I have used it without a viewfinder.

As to the OVF/EVF debate. I'm prepared to wager that in 10 years time the majority of dSLR's sold will have EVF's. I may not like it but it'll happen.

Now I'm off to finish a roll of film off on my Olympus Trip..... and if Olympus could put a decent finder in that camera 30 odd years ago they can do the same to the EP series......