Camera Labs

Answer 1: They don't release any more cameras of that kind
Answer 2: EOS M Mark II


I think those cameras are a nice addition to the set of EOS as it takes all the accessories (lenses via adapter) and so it can be a choice for those who'd buy a "small" xxxD as a "small second body". Now they get something even smaller and still the image quality should be the same as in the 650D.
The problem is the price - I wouldn't buy it for more than 500€. The lens choice is small (unless you count the EF lenses like my 100-400mm to it ) so if I had to choose a mirrorless camera I'd rather go for the G1X or a MFT camera (Olympus E-P3, for example).

I'd love to see the Speedlite 90EX on a 5D Mark III, which is another camera without an internal flash

_________________
Canon EOS 500D + Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Canon EF 24-105mm 4L IS USM + EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM + EF 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM + Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM + Canon Speedlite 580 EX II + Nissin Speedlite Di 466

See an EOS M fitted to a 70-200mm f/2.8

Here you go. Too bad it aint on a white body.

Moderator Edit: I've replaced the image with a link to the image. The size exceeded our 1024 pixel forum limit but, more importantly, DPR are very explicit on their site about their images being subject to copyright. Bob Andersson.

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M5, Panasonic GF-3, Canon SX40HS

Panasonic Pancake 14mm f2.5, Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4, Olympus Zuiko 75mm f1.8
Panasonic 14-42mm

I've seen this shot before but that's a rather extreme perspective...

_________________
Canon EOS 500D + Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Canon EF 24-105mm 4L IS USM + EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM + EF 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM + Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM + Canon Speedlite 580 EX II + Nissin Speedlite Di 466

Hi folks,

Wanna see what a white M looks like behind a 400mm f/2.8L? Check out the video Canon EOS M Mirrorless Camera Hands-On from engadget.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Thanks Bob, that's great!

_________________
Mike "The Squirrel"
Canon 550D | Canon EF 35mm 1:2 | Canon 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 18-125mm DC OS | Tamron SP 70-300mm Di VC USD | Canon 430EX II
Military Issued Canon 40D | Canon 55-250mm IS

Interesting, though quite expensive. If the EF-to-M lens adapter is also expensive, I will probably disregard the M, on a simple cost-benefit basis. I also have misgivings about the touch-screen being useful in bright sunlight, and wonder if it might be too bright at night*. An accessory viewfinder could remedy this, to an extent, but it seems no viewfinder is planned. A hood would work to shade the screen, but that would complicate using the touch controls, and add bulk. It seems Canon is not aiming for the professional/serious enthusiast market with this one. I am still open-minded, but this one is very low on my attention scale, for now.

Really, my 5D, with the new 40mm EF 2.8 pancake lens, is an amazingly light, compact, handy package, able to fit into a Think Tank Body Bag, worn on a belt. (The Body Bag is made to hold a DSLR body, minus a lens, but a pancake lens is so tiny, it can remain on the camera.) I really do like the 40mm field of view; very useful!

I am not ignoring mirror-less cameras. The Fuji X Pro-1 and Leica X2 have my attention, with the Nikon 1 V1 a possibility. I may even re-visit the G1 X. I plan to wait until the 2013-2014 time period, anyway.

*I use tough-screen electronics at work, and have personal experience with such gadgets being useless in bright sunlight, and too bright at night.

_________________
Canon 7D/5D/40D/1D2N; Nikon F6, FM3A, & Coolpix A; Canon 40mm Pancake, 135L, 50L, 35L, pre-II 50mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L Macro, 10-22mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, 400mm 5.6L; Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AI-S, 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.8D, 16mm 2.8D Fisheye, 180mm 2.8D, 100-300mm 5.6 AI-S; Tokina 17mm & 100mm 2.8 Macro

I agree with the concern about it being useless in bright sunlight but you can dim the 550D's screen to acceptable brightness at night - for the EOS M not to include that would be an almighty wasted opportunity.

_________________
Bodies: Canon EOS 550D w/ Magic Lantern
Lenses: Tokina AT-X 116 Pro DX f/2.8, Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Accessories: YongNuo Speedlite YN-468 Flash, Neewer Macro LED Ring Light, Meike Battery Grip, YongNuo RF-602 Wireless Flash Trigger & Receiver YongNuo WR-128 Wireless Remote Control

Hi folks,

For those who worry that the "M" has the ergonomics of a point and shoot camera think back to Sony's NEX launch. The NEX-3 and NEX-5 did well but it only took them about a year to also launch the NEX-7 although shipping was delayed by factors outside the company's control. I'd expect Canon to follow suit but, of course, that's pure speculation on my part.

One thing I think Canon should do immediately however - or by Photokina at the latest - is announce a lens roadmap. The initial offering is good enough for starters, although Sony went one better by also launching the NEX system with a telephoto zoom, but the idea of having a CSC lies in the word "compact" and legacy EF/EF-S glass on an "M" plus EF-M adaptor is anything but compact.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

For tele lenses there is no real space saving from a "mirrorless" body. So there isn't really a penalty using a SLR lens other than perhaps focus speed. For sure, more compact lenses are needed in the wide angle up to standard ball park.

And we also have to revert back to the old argument of "small enough" and I'd still argue that, for me, no current mirrorless system (including M) is really "small enough" over a DSLR to be really significant. I would just buy a compact like the HX9V or similar instead if small size while retaining high functionality were really important. I would put things in three size classes: 1: pocketable. 2: coat pocketable, 3: not pocketable. Mirrorless currently sits in category 2 providing you limited yourself to only using pancakes, so in that sense it provides less overall value than 1 or 3 when making a size vs functionality tradeoff.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

Hi popo,

Weell, my E-M5 plus Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm / F3.5-5.6 ASPH does fit pretty comfortably in my trouser pocket but, admittedly, I do have extremely capacious trousers!

My m4/3rds 14-42mm lens, being a pancake zoom, really does highlight how Canon need to offer more lens choices sooner rather than later. As for the size of tele lenses, fair point although it may be useful to compare the Olympus Zuiko ED 40-150mm f4.0-5.6 (a 4/3rds lens) and the newly announced Lumix G Vario 45-150mm/F4.0-5.6 ASPH./MEGA O.I.S. (a m4/3rds lens). Both lenses have a similar number of optical elements, so I would hope they would perform similarly optically, and are virtually the same size except, of course, that the Zuiko would additionally need an adaptor for use on a m4/3rds body which adds extra length and weight.

So I'll stick to my suggestion that Canon might usefully add a native telephoto zoom to the EOS M line-up and might also consider a pancake "standard" zoom as well in due course. On a very positive note, if the phase detect AF system on the EOS M main sensor works well then the "M" can sensibly use all of the legacy EF/EF-S glass. Currently that's not a luxury afforded to either m4/3rds users (with 4/3rds glass) or NEX users (without an expensive adaptor) unless they are prepared to accept slow and/or erratic AF from most legacy glass from their respective systems.

The EOS M wouldn't have been for me even if I hadn't sold my Canon lenses earlier this year but I'm actually feeling very positive about where Canon are headed over the next few years. But I still think a lens roadmap is in order even though, very understandably, they won't share plans for future bodies.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

Yeah, too expensive for my blood.

Now we need to see the ultimate "big lens/little camera" photo. 1200mm anyone?

Here we go, 800mm http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/eosm800.jpg

_________________
Mike "The Squirrel"
Canon 550D | Canon EF 35mm 1:2 | Canon 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 18-125mm DC OS | Tamron SP 70-300mm Di VC USD | Canon 430EX II
Military Issued Canon 40D | Canon 55-250mm IS

First off, a really good job of analyzing the camera. Hats off!

Since I own the 60D some lenses and several flash, the EOS-M was initially very interesting to me. (here comes the "however") However, to use it with my 18-135 lens, it would cost me $800 USD for the camera and 22 f/2 lens, and another $200 for the adapter. Locally, I can get a clean used Canon T2i for $400 with the 18-55 IS lens. The EOS-M+adapter +18-135 saves about 5 oz. (140 grams) over the T2i+18-135 combination; and neither combo is remotely pocketable, especially since the adapter adds about 28 mm to the length of the lens.

It seems that the ability of the EOS-M to use EF & EF-S lenses is more of an illusion than reality. For one thing, the EOS-M body does not have enough of a grip to handle a larger lens. Back in the film days, I ended up making an add-on grip for my Nikon FE2 as it had no front or back grip and a winder added too much weight and wasn't that comfortable to use. An optional add-on for the EOS-M would help a lot; but now the weight and size are very close to that T2i.

One alternative that no one has mentioned would be the use of prime lenses with the EOS-M. Starting with the 22 f/2 (35 mm, equivalent), the 50 f/1.8 (85 mm, equiv.), and a 85 f/1.8 (136 mm, equiv.) or 100 f/2 (160 mm) and you've got a very manageable, very fast system that covers most activities and situations if a little foot-zoom is added. No IS; but with that lens speed and the APS-C sensor, it isn't really needed. But, unfortunately, the cost of such a system is quite high.

Jerry

_________________
Jerry

I'm 90% sold. I'll be 100% when they come out with the version that has a viewfinder... I love the idea of being able to pack this body+22mm lens for a vacation, and then if I want some zoom I can add in an adaptor plus my girlfriend's 55-250 and we're good to go. I just can't stand having only an LCD on the back for composition, mostly in bright sunlight (i.e. at the beach).

I think my girlfriend may even be sold on this... which means the bank account may one day be able to release the appropriate funds

_________________
Canon EOS 5D MkII | Canon EOS 7D | Canon Digital Rebel XSi | EF 35mm f/1.4L | EF 50mm f/1.8 II | EF 85mm f/1.8 | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM | EF 135mm f/2L | EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS | 580EX II | LumoPro LP-120

My Flickr

I think it will serve well as a lens cap. If you are one of those that travel with two lenses, why not attach a sensor at the back of your back up glass? No time wasted to change but take out and shoot.

If you have time and the situation calls for it, you may switch and use your main body...

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M5, Panasonic GF-3, Canon SX40HS

Panasonic Pancake 14mm f2.5, Panasonic Leica 25mm f1.4, Olympus Zuiko 75mm f1.8
Panasonic 14-42mm