Boutique cameras. What is the use?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadowman

Even more of a concern if mounted on a tripod and there isn't a mounting collar on the lens. I purchased a 70-300mm 4/3rds (21 ounce) lens for my pen-epl1 and carrying it around is a chore, but so glad to have it when you need it. I tried using this combo as a walkaround lens about three times, much better having it in the camera bag.

---

Firstly you can get tripod mounting collars as add-ons ... check out www.srb-griturn.com if you cannot find a stateside supplier.
Unless you also have the VF-2 or VF-3 I would think the lens quite unsuitable for the epl-1 and I wouldn't mount the lens on the poor wee camera sitting on a tripod :) I have the camera too which lives with a 50mm legacy lens.
I would suggest that my rig, 14-140 with GH2, gives me enough reach as a walk around and I can crop for greater ... Though I also have the lovely lightweight Olympus TCON x1.7 which adds on to give me near 500mm reach. You need a step-down ring to mount this which stays on the lens 7/24 as the mount is well outside the glass. [ 62>55 from memory or maybe 58>55 ]

I have a EOS M, and still cannot make my mind up about it. I bought it as a very light spare body, for example when there is not time to clean the sensor on a special trip.
In fact its quite good, though very slow focusing. The ability to put say a canon 10 - 22 lens for wide angle is more than any point and shoot will do. For big lenses the lens adaptor for EF lenses has its own tripod mount, a nice touch.
For photographing where one shouldn't the touch screen focus and fire mode is good. If only it had a propper remote shutter control, so I could hold it in one hand and fire the shutter by radio with the other.
yep its nearly right.

That's my impression. I picked one up and played with it at Fry's, and was surprised, after having read all the reviews about how crappy the AF speed on it was to actually experience the variance in AF speed across the board. One or two shots it would be dSLR speeds, then one or two, and it would be searching through the entire range and going P&S slow. But overall, the way it handled was very natural and nice. I far preferred the menu system to the one on my Panasonic mft camera, and the inclusion of the Digic 5 flash control panel makes me soooo jealous.

Neat to know they put the tripod mount on the adapter.

I know it's not really the solution you were hoping for, but have you considered getting a Canon IR remote? IIRC, the EOS M has the IR shutter release sensor in it. A used RC-1 would be just the ticket to keep things small--it clips onto the camera strap and is about the size of my thumb.

Also curious--would you consider swapping it in for an SL1/100D (which does have a cable release port), instead? The SL1 seems to be a better fit for those who want a small, cheap EOS backup body.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

You do not have to put outsize lenses on but get lenses designed for the camera

---

Kathy is talking about the Canon EOS M.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Kathy is talking about the Canon EOS M.

---

Sorry Kathy .. but really the whole idea of a mirrorless APS-C is quite silly when we have MFT with lenses designed to match the lightness and compact size of the bodies. If Canikon want to play they should join with Oly-Pan with MFT not start their own abstruces.
Look that up in the dictionary .. I did :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

Sorry Kathy .. but really the whole idea of a mirrorless APS-C is quite silly when we have MFT with lenses designed to match the lightness and compact size of the bodies. If Canikon want to play they should join with Oly-Pan with MFT not start their own abstruces.
Look that up in the dictionary .. I did :)

---

You DO know I shoot a Panasonic G3 as well as Canon EOS (APS-C and full-frame), right? ;) And I was the one making that exact point: that putting only adapted EOS lenses on an EOS-M defeats the whole point of getting a small mirrorless body.

And aren't you being a little bit closed-minded on the subject of APS-C, given how NEX and Fuji X shooters seem to be perfectly happy with their systems? It's not everybody's cuppa to trade off high iso noise performance and DoF control for smaller lenses. And then there are the Sony RX-1 and Leica M9 shooters who prefer full frame...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inkista

putting only adapted EOS lenses on an EOS-M defeats the whole point of getting a small mirrorless body.

---

I don't think it's quite that cut and dry -- being able to use any EF / EF-S lens gives you options to use any EF / EF-S lens in your "lens cache" - for whatever reason you want to - without any additional cost. Perhaps you like EOS M, but don't want to replicate all your lenses to a smaller format for occasions when you need a different length to what you have? Perhaps you want it as a backup? Perhaps you want to be able to travel light but still rent a lens?

In my opinion it's no big deal - from the consumer's point of view, if they don't like it then they don't have to buy it - from Canon's point of view they can release the body without having to delay it a couple of years whilst the team produces 10 lenses for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

I don't think it's quite that cut and dry -- being able to use any EF / EF-S lens gives you options to use any EF / EF-S lens in your "lens cache" - for whatever reason you want to - without any additional cost. ...

---

And what about the new shooter who doesn't have any gear yet?

And given that you don't shoot mirrorless, I can see why the "smaller size/weight" argument doesn't actually count with you. But for someone who picked up mft gear specifically for that purpose, it really is that cut and dried to me. Until EOS-M has a native lens system that can fulfill my needs, it's not going to be replacing my mft kit any time soon. I'm really hoping it does, though. Because the one place where mft has really fallen down for me is with flash gear.

I'd love to use all my off-camera EOS flash gear with a mirrorless camera; but Yongnuo / Phottix / Pixel / RadioPopper / PocketWizard don't make mft-compatible TTL triggers or flashes, the Oly FL-50 has the most demented UI I've ever seen on a speedlight (modes: Auto, Auto-TTL, Manual, TTL-FP, Manual-FP. Yes. HSS is not something you just turn on and off. You have to be in the right mode to have HSS. Oh, and manual control isn't by power ratio--it's by guide number. Like I said. Demented.) and Panasonic figures you're happy in TTL-only land and why would you ever take a flash off the hotshoe? [facehands]

Just me, but I'd put the flash compatibility of the EOS-M above the glass compatibility by a factor of ten. Especially since it a) has the flash control panel of the 6D/5DMkIII, with b) a touchscreen LCD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcuknz

Sorry Kathy .. but really the whole idea of a mirrorless APS-C is quite silly when we have MFT with lenses designed to match the lightness and compact size of the bodies. If Canikon want to play they should join with Oly-Pan with MFT not start their own abstruces.
Look that up in the dictionary .. I did :)

---

i own both m4/3 and an APS-C mirrorless (I know I know why both!). In my case a Fuji x-e1. in low light the Fuji is a fair bit better. the fuji is not that much bigger and nor are the lenses. the respective "50"mm primes are identical in size. true the kit zoom is bigger but it is a cracking lens. much better than any Nikkon/panny kit lens I've used.

but i do like the m4/3 as a system. that 12-35 f2.8 is so mall compared to the aps-c equivalents. and a gx1 and pancakes is so pocketable!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inkista

And what about the new shooter who doesn't have any gear yet?

---

They're free to buy any competing system they like if they feel that the Canon (or any other system) system doesn't meet their needs.

It always amazes me whenever anybody releases a new system be it anything from Canon's mirrorless system to Lecia's M Monochome - immediately there is a chorus of comment from the "Monday morning quarterbacks" and magazine "reviewers" saying "why what they did was wrong" and - with pretty much ZERO insight into any business engineering or marketing disciplines - "what they SHOULD have done" (just a general comment - not "aimed" at you).

My response to them is "really, they're not that stupid" - backed up by the fact that the manufacturers business model is one hell of a lot more successful than the person doing the criticizing.

Jack Sprat could eat no fat.
His wife could eat no lean.
And so between them both, you see,
They licked the platter clean

Or in other words there are several formats, systems, brand solutions whatever you want to call them because not everyone wants the same thing from their camera.

My impressions having sold them since they were released:

For the casual/family shooter the Nikon One System is the best as it truly is small, fast, easy and user friendly.

For the enthusiast/amateur photographer then I'd say the NEX is the best. They have fantastic sensors, are blisteringly fast, shoot Full HD/60p, take just about any lens you want and if its a MF one the focus peaking is brilliant.

For someone who grew up with manual cameras, has the disposable income to spend and wants something that is beautiful as well as good (very few products are both) then a Fuji X or a Leica M will appeal. Many will scream and shout about the cost, performance and all sorts of other intangibles, summarising that you'd be mad to buy one because xxx can do the same for a fraction of the cost - the cost of a product is only relevant to the person buying it.

The above isn't a comprehensive list, it isn't a definitive list, it isn't a list all will agree with but it illustrates a point.

We all want something personal from our equipment and thankfully there are products out there for all of us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dje

Antonio I dare say they give good image quality but a fixed lens with no zoom would be too restrictive for me I think.

---

I never had a zoom or second lens with any film camera I ever owned, and I never felt constrained by that. Once I went digital, I found it incredibly limiting to only have 10x zoom range. Go figure...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by black pearl

Jack Sprat could eat no fat.
His wife could eat no lean.
And so between them both, you see,
They licked the platter clean

Or in other words there are several formats, systems, brand solutions whatever you want to call them because not everyone wants the same thing from their camera.

My impressions having sold them since they were released:

For the casual/family shooter the Nikon One System is the best as it truly is small, fast, easy and user friendly.

For the enthusiast/amateur photographer then I'd say the NEX is the best. They have fantastic sensors, are blisteringly fast, shoot Full HD/60p, take just about any lens you want and if its a MF one the focus peaking is brilliant.

For someone who grew up with manual cameras, has the disposable income to spend and wants something that is beautiful as well as good (very few products are both) then a Fuji X or a Leica M will appeal. Many will scream and shout about the cost, performance and all sorts of other intangibles, summarising that you'd be mad to buy one because xxx can do the same for a fraction of the cost - the cost of a product is only relevant to the person buying it.

The above isn't a comprehensive list, it isn't a definitive list, it isn't a list all will agree with but it illustrates a point.

We all want something personal from our equipment and thankfully there are products out there for all of us.

---

a Fuji x with lens is not that much different than a sony nex6. under a grand for the fuji over 5k for a Leica M.... i have to admit I'd go for m4/3 over nex but each to his own!

I agree with you about the Nikon 1 though. Nikon have got the pricing wrong methinks but at current prices a v1 is a very good buy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

It always amazes me whenever anybody releases a new system be it anything from Canon's mirrorless system to Lecia's M Monochome - immediately there is a chorus of comment from the "Monday morning quarterbacks" and magazine "reviewers" saying "why what they did was wrong" and - with pretty much ZERO insight into any business engineering or marketing disciplines - "what they SHOULD have done" (just a general comment - not "aimed" at you).

---

Oh, this I heartily agree with. Nikon 1 being a really good example. I kept pointing out over and over again that it was the ideal soccer-mom camera, only to be told that nobody in their right minds would ever want the thing because of the small sensor size. What was doubly ironic was that only a few months later, you saw these same nay-sayers drooling all over the Sony RX-100 because of the sensor size--and both of them have the same size sensor. [headshake]. Lack of imagination, and inability to walk in someone else's shoes, I expect. Or inability to actually analyze specs beyond dpreview's expressed opinion of same. (Remember all those "the 60D is just a dRebel" statements?). If it doesn't fit their personal needs/dream specs RIGHT NOW, then total condemnation is expressed.

I blame dpreview forums for a lot.

Quote:

---

My response to them is "really, they're not that stupid" - backed up by the fact that the manufacturers business model is one hell of a lot more successful than the person doing the criticizing.

---

But then why did Pentax make the K-01?! [whine] :) [man. $750 to $300 in less than a year]. I agree, though. I know the 100D/SL1 is a good idea, I'm just trying to suss out how it's a good idea. Lady shooters, obviously. Cheap 2nd backup body, too. But I can't help feeling there's something I'm missing...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by black pearl

... My impressions having sold them since they were released:

For the casual/family shooter the Nikon One System is the best as it truly is small, fast, easy and user friendly.

For the enthusiast/amateur photographer then I'd say the NEX is the best....

---

Agree, although the Fuji X and mft enthusiasts will fight you on that. :) Budget-wise, though, I think mft appeals more to the bargain-hunting crowd, NEX to the mid-budget folks, and Fuji X to the high-ticket crowd. :)

One of the the things I find curious, though, is that you constantly keep running into threads on mirrorless boards titled "who's dumped their SLR gear?". There's a faint whiff of chip-on-the-shoulder about this statement every time I read it. As if nobody ever shot multiple systems before, and there is only The One True System of happiness. This internet fanboi identification with one's camera brand/format is kind of nuts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inkista

Agree, although the Fuji X and mft enthusiasts will fight you on that. :) Budget-wise, though, I think mft appeals more to the bargain-hunting crowd, NEX to the mid-budget folks, and Fuji X to the high-ticket crowd. :)

One of the the things I find curious, though, is that you constantly keep running into threads on mirrorless boards titled "who's dumped their SLR gear?". There's a faint whiff of chip-on-the-shoulder about this statement every time I read it. As if nobody ever shot multiple systems before, and there is only The One True System of happiness. This internet fanboi identification with one's camera brand/format is kind of nuts.

---

well I have dumped my dSLR :) still got two systems though ;) There are things a dSLR is much better for than a mirrorless just not for my current needs.


and if I repeat it enough...... the Fuji is not THAT much more than a Sony! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inkista

One of the the things I find curious, though, is that you constantly keep running into threads on mirrorless boards titled "who's dumped their SLR gear?". There's a faint whiff of chip-on-the-shoulder about this statement every time I read it. As if nobody ever shot multiple systems before, and there is only The One True System of happiness. This internet fanboi identification with one's camera brand/format is kind of nuts.

---

Kathy it's no different to the Canon/Nikon user who insists one brand is better than the other. Or the person who switches brands then tells you their new brand is the bee knees until they switch again! there are endless blogs on the net where the blogger praised X and then switched to Y and tells you it is ssssooooo much better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inkista

Oh, this I heartily agree with.

---

Yayyy - we agree - doesn't happen often :D

Quote:

---

I blame dpreview forums for a lot.

---

Thinking about it, I think it's become somewhat of a "twisted metric" (for want of better words) where the perceived believe-ability of magazines & forums exceeds (in the eyes of many) the perceived believe-ability of the manufacturers, because "we all know that manufacturers will lie through their teeth because they just want to sell product" (which I think is true to a degree), but the reality is that the opinions promulgated through reviews and forums are so biased by personal preferences & prejudices (and editors / webmasters who want to sound authoritive so as to bolster their site over others -- they are commercial ventures too don't forget) that in my opinion they actually DESERVE even less credibility.

Personally, I just ignore 99% of it for the biased / un-informed / political / manipulated / BS that it is. Sorting the wheat from the chaff has never been harder.

Quote:

---

But then why did Pentax make the K-01?! [whine] :) [man. $750 to $300 in less than a year].

---

I'm not saying that they always get it right - sometimes it's a gamble - and sometimes the gamble doesn't pay off. Keep in mind that with commercial competition one is always "shooting at a moving target"; what seems like a good idea when they start a project like the K-01 may fail due to unexpected competitors products or mis-reading the market (and who's to say that they actually did a loss on it -- perhaps they drew heavily on existing designs, components, and technologies and still made a margin on it, albeit not the return on investment that they were hoping for)?

Point is though that - in reality - manufactures like Canon (that I'm more familiar with) get it "right" far more than they get it "wrong" whereas if one were to believe everything one reads in "internet land" you could be excused for believing that all manufacturers were nothing more than nameless incompetent fools and faceless blithering idiots who were totally out of touch with their customers. Whereas I believe that they're a LOT smarter then people give them credit for (they're certainly smart enough to avoid the all the dribble written by the masses).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thequacksoflife

and if I repeat it enough...... the Fuji is not THAT much more than a Sony! ... :)

---

There, there. You just go on believing that...

($US prices on B&H):
[low end kit + fast normal prime]
X-E1 kit+ 35/1.4 = $1400 + $600 => $2000
NEX-3N kit + 35/1.8 = $500 +$450 => $950
GF-5 kit + 20/1.7 = $400 + $350 => $750

[high-end body + fast normal prime]
X-Pro1 body + 35/1.4 = $1400 + $600 => $2000
NEX-6 body + 35/1.8 = $850 + $450 => $1300
OM-D body + 25/1.4 = $1000 + $500 => $1500

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thequacksoflife

Kathy it's no different to the Canon/Nikon user who insists one brand is better than the other. Or the person who switches brands then tells you their new brand is the bee knees until they switch again! there are endless blogs on the net where the blogger praised X and then switched to Y and tells you it is ssssooooo much better.

---

Actually, I think it is different. It's very similar yes, but the Canikon wars are more like rival teams; nobody even questions the assumption of equal footing. Mirrorless boasters, otoh, tend to labor under the impression that all and sundry assume dSLR to be superior--hence the chip on the shoulder. It could just be the usual size thing (i.e., "bigger is better.") ;) Ever point out to a Pentax shooter they don't have a full-frame body in the lineup? Some of them go ballistic and have to bring up the 645. Without fail. You've impugned their manhood or something, I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Yayyy - we agree - doesn't happen often :D

---

[grin].

Quote:

---

... Personally, I just ignore 99% of it for the biased / un-informed / political / manipulated / BS that it is. Sorting the wheat from the chaff has never been harder.

---

Hey, it's the internet. Always lively, never boring, and usually gonzo. That's why you just surf it; don't go deep sea diving. You learn whose voices you trust and you go with them. Personally, I skew towards the folks with a ton of actual experience with film and digital and multiple systems and who can interpret specs into the real world with ease: the TOP and Luminous Landscape contributors, and Roger Cicala of lensrentals being among them. Anyone who trusts dpreview and Ken Rockwell implicitly to write their opinions for them? Well, they kind of deserve what they get ... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inkista

There, there. You just go on believing that...

($US prices on B&H):
[low end kit + fast normal prime]
X-E1 kit+ 35/1.4 = $1400 + $600 => $2000
NEX-3N kit + 35/1.8 = $500 +$450 => $950
GF-5 kit + 20/1.7 = $400 + $350 => $750

[high-end body + fast normal prime]
X-Pro1 body + 35/1.4 = $1400 + $600 => $2000
NEX-6N body + 35/1.8 = $850 + $450 => $1300
OM-D body + 25/1.4 = $1000 + $500 => $1500

---

now now Kathy that is just plain disingenuous an XE1 body is much more analogous to a the NEX-6. than it is the the NEX-3 GF5.......

in the UK
NEX 6 + 35 f1.8 = £619 + £379 = £998
F XE1 + 35 f1.4 = £629 + £429 = £1058

all prices from wexphotographic.com

but since you insist in linking Fuji and Leica price wise.....

Leica ME + 35f2 = £3.900 +£1,900 = £5,800

took those from Robert White

I think we can safely ignore Leica......or if you prefer "there there you go on believing that" ;)

i have no problems stating that for some things a dSLR is much much better than a mirrorless and when people go on about fast focus i get annoyed since the pannies and olympus are fine for single point focus but if something moves they are rubbish. and yes fuji is worse than panny.

but I have to chuckle when I'm in say Florence and I see someone lugging a round an f2.8 Canikon set around to shoot with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inkista

Hey, it's the internet. Always lively, never boring, and usually gonzo. That's why you just surf it; don't go deep sea diving. You learn whose voices you trust and you go with them. Personally, I skew towards the folks with a ton of actual experience with film and digital and multiple systems and who can interpret specs into the real world with ease: the TOP and Luminous Landscape contributors, and Roger Cicala of lensrentals being among them. Anyone who trusts dpreview and Ken Rockwell implicitly to write their opinions for them? Well, they kind of deserve what they get ... ;)

---

Well I agree with you there. TOP is a superb blog essential reading.

the imaging resource website is pretty good.

as to Rockwell? he is a model of impartiality and restraint....... .. cough cough cough choke

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

Point is though that - in reality - manufactures like Canon (that I'm more familiar with) get it "right" far more than they get it "wrong" whereas if one were to believe everything one reads in "internet land" you could be excused for believing that all manufacturers were nothing more than nameless incompetent fools and faceless blithering idiots who were totally out of touch with their customers. Whereas I believe that they're a LOT smarter then people give them credit for (they're certainly smart enough to avoid the all the dribble written by the masses).

---

Hogan is always slamming Nikon over their compacts but they are selling more year on year.....