Canon missed the whole point. Really.

The mirrorless, interchangeable lens Canon.  Really?

I'm sure that many people will buy this camera.  But why?

Let me back up and say that this camera will probably be a nice camera. Why? The promise of good high ISO performance which seems to be so important to so many amateur photographers.  The familiar name.  The minimal design. A nice bright screen on the back.  A normal hot shoe and.......that's about it.

I'm amazed at both the price and the offering. Let's start with the ultimate deal killer:  At $799 you get a point and shoot camera, with an interchangeable, single focal length lens, that you must hold at arm's length in order to focus or view the image. There's not even a port for an add-on EVF.  Have Canon not been paying attention to the growing legion of photographers who have figured out just how great EVFs are?  How cynical.  The cunning corporate concept seems to be that the iPhone and iPhoneography have so dumbed down picture takers that now the dirty baby diaper camera hold is considered a reasonable standard?   I guess no one shoots in the sunlight anymore. I guess no one wants a really stable camera hold.

It's basically a re-do of their boring G1X bloated compact camera but without the swivel screen, without the pop-up flash and without even the benefit of a creepy, point 85 plastic optical viewfinder.  So you actually get a lot less stuff but the same performance for the same basic price point?  And this makes sense to rational photographers? How?

I want to ask the people who have already rushed to pre-order one of these from Amazon, "What were you thinking?  Have you never seen a Panasonic G3 or G5 or GX1? or Olympus EPL-2? Or even a Canon rebel T3i?"  There are so many great bargains out there that this camera seems unbelievably cynical.

For the majestic price of $799 for what is basically a box camera you could have a Nikon D3200 with 24 screaming good megapixels, a very decent VR kit lens, a real optical finder,  a built in flash, and four 32 gigabyte SD cards.  You'd end up with a decent and flexible zoom lens and a camera with a real finder and an LCD screen.  Two for the price of one.

Is it the size? Surely people have read the reviews of the Sony RX 100 which is about 1/3 smaller and probably makes images that are just as good.

I hope someone can explain it to me because I'm mystified. What is the appeal?  Is it just "safe" because it's a Canon?

If I were in the market for a small, mirror-less camera I'd be waiting for the next generation of Olympus Pen cameras.  If they incorporate the IBIS and sensor of the OMD EM-5 Canon buyers who later compare will probably be reduced to tears.  Oh well.  To each their own....I guess.

edit:  July 24:  a more detailed discussion of the new Canon can be found on ATMTX's blog:
http://blog.atmtxphoto.com/2012/07/23/the-canon-eos-m-how-does-it-stack-up/   It's a good read.

edit:  July 25th.  ATMTX adds one more good column to the Canon mirrorless discussion:


  1. Replies
    1. I haven't gotten a chance to look at the stats yet. It's branded EOS, does that mean it can use EOS lenses? I really was expecting Canon to come out with a camera that people could use as either a secondary body or a slightly cheaper entry into DSLR. Sounds like this isn't it.

    2. EOS lenses can be used with an optional adapter. Yes. Big lenses on a small body.

    3. I have EOS lenses. Not sure why I'd want to put them on that body, with no grip and no viewfinder.
      Wouldn't everybody who has EOS lenses already have at least one body for them?

      Don't think this camera is meant for us, although the 22mm f2 is interesting. Hope they bring out another model with, at least, a viewfinder.

      I guess I'm also not sure why a birthday-party-shooter, who's mostly going to post the pictures on Facebook, needs a bigger sensor. Especially for $800.
      That guy has better options.

      But I bet it sells a ton, if only because Canon is in Best-Buy and similar stores, and Panasonic/Olympus/Sony may not be.

  2. On Canon's part, I think they are playing it very, very safe. Start with something very basic, something that their own crowd (existing users of Canon DSLRs and compact cameras) will be willing to accept, and not going all out to win the wider audience. This EOS-M is sort of like testing water, it was the first of the line, and after the feedback and response from the audience they get, perhaps they will move on to create the second camera, which might be targeted to kill other competitors.
    I am sure people will buy it just for the brand "Canon" itself, and how much they have come to trust the brand. As usual Canon will use their dirty marketing tricks to brainwash everyone into thinking that this little EOS-M is how it should have been done and how it is a better choice than everything else in the market. Just watch.

    1. "Dirty marketing tricks to brainwash everyone" ...? Wow, that is cynical! How do they "brainwash" people into buying this camera?

      The camera has a lot to offer and for some people will be the perfect camera. Yes, believe it or not, some people would love to have a camera just like this — big sensor, no viewfinder, almost no buttons, interchangeable lenses, touch screen, etc., etc.

      Just because it's not the perfect camera for me or you doesn't mean Canon is up to some evil. They are in business to sell cameras and as far as I can see they do a very fine job of that, making a lot of people happy with their products. Internet commenters should really get past the idea that everything that doesn't meet their current personal photographic needs is the result of some devious plan to do wrong in the world.

    2. I must say I can believe their are people who WANT no viewfinder. There maybe people who are okay with not having one or who are willing to compromise for the sake of staying small, but I don't believe their is a strong lobby that is rejecting valuable features.

    3. Kirk, you know what I stand on the viewfinder issue. But there are certainly times when a viewfinder is very useful or preferable. I know not having a viewfinder option will be a big sticking point for many.

    4. I agree. The name Canon attracts people. If people ignored the brand and only looked at the specs, quality, and how it feels. I doubt it would sell. I'm definitely not impressed but I'm sure there will be something better coming soon.

    5. Zlatko, I couldn't have put it any better.

    6. This is a camera for those who enjoy shooting with an iPhone but want more lens selection. The touchscreen and lack of buttons make the camera look easier to use and unless you want to go menu diving, that's true.

      Plus, it's cute. That appears to be the main appeal of this beyond the touch screen.

    7. I've heard people say that they preferred the lcd, and didn't want to look through a "squinty" viewfinder.

      But they're mostly young folks who haven't had to deal with the heartbreak of presbyopia. :-)

    8. This could be like Sony's early NEX cameras which offered no provision for accepting what would come later, an optional OLED viewfinder. Without some sort of roadmap, people are left guessing. Those who want functionality this camera doesn't offer are faced with a choice of waiting, and maybe being disappointed again later down the road, or looking elsewhere.

      I'm on the side of the fence that feels this particular camera is a failure, given where we are along the mirrorless camera evolutionary line up, and where it has come in terms of price point. If it were priced lower, there'd be less room for complaint. Again Sony offers a useful comparison.

      Priced as is, Canon should at least have designed into the camera a path to add on an external viewfinder down the road. Now that would have me interested.

  3. Well said. Captures my thoughts. No VF=no sale.

  4. One reason it will sell, existing Canon users.

    Another reason- APS-C sensor, tried and true.

    One more- It has Canon on it. You know the average consumer, especially in the USA, regards Canon highly.

    It's pancake is 35mm f/2, thats a nice start :).

    Otherwise the body is vanilla, and not all that appealing for enthusiasts but vanilla might just be what the average consumer likes the most.

    It's pretty hard to imagine that Canon won't do an enthusiast model, right Kirk?


    1. I'm only commenting on their first product. They may well follow up with an incredible camera. I don't know. A lot of people had high hopes for the G1x....

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. The price is unacceptably high for the entry level model without EVF and no bundled flash option.

    If Canon will probably put out a "pro" version which would make this $800 purchase worth a lot less in the long run.

    The best I can say about the EOS-M is that the allure of using my smaller EF lens with it is sufficient to make me think about pausing before going with my initial plan of buying a OM-D w/ 12-50 zoom and the Panasonic 25/1.4. I'll probably still buy the OM-D, but, I'm going to wait a few more months to see if there is any rumor of something better than what Canon has put out so far.

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

  8. Kirk, you know I have several Olympus Pen cameras, a Sony NEX-5 and a Canon 7D. Here is my take, just posted on my blog.
    The Canon EOS M, how does it stack up?

    1. I've read ATMTX's article and agree with most of his points. I've also placed a link at the end of my article. It's a good read.

  9. I was unsurprised that Kirk Tuck, the man who popularized the photography term "stinky diaper", would disapprove of the Canon EOS-m. No EVF, no sale. Same for me. But our own experiential biases obscure the realities of the mass market.

    Canon correctly assumes the "serious" photographers will just keep buying their SLR's. In the US, mirrorless cameras are a niche fringe. I'm the ONLY one regularly shooting mirrorless in a photoclub of 200+. So while the mirrorless photonerds are debating this, everyone else is giving us an indifferent "meh", while shooting instagrams with their iphones. When it counts, people are still buying SLRs in America.

    Robin is right, this is a play it safe approach, using a shared sensor and only two original lenses to start a system. It's even an more conservative punt than Nikon's System 1. At least they launched with three lenses.

    Canon pretty much went down the non-photographer's checklist:
    1) Rear screen live view, aka stinky diaper cam: CHECK
    2) Lots of megapixels: CHECK
    3) Minimal controls: CHECK
    4) small size: CHECK
    5) known brand name: CHECK
    6) video mode: CHECK. This may actually be what saves it
    7) wide availability at big box stores: MAYBE. Word is that it will be sold at specialty retailers.

    And despite this consumer focus, there are 3 reasons it won't sell at your local WalMart:
    1) price: as Kirk pointed out, a basic SLR kit is $600, this is $800 and...

    2) it doesn't zoom: in a rare move for Canon, the 18-55mm zoom is a $300 extra. On an $800 camera. Consumers prefer zooms. Every time I suggest to a beginner a setup that is smaller, faster focusing, and sharper, all I hear is "but does it zoom?"

    3) autofocus: UNCERTAIN. If the AF performance on the 40mm STM is any indication, the AF speed will be what sinks this ship. If you can't focus faster than a phone or a point and shoot, you're dead in the water. The first time it is used on kids or a soccer game, it will get returned.

  10. From Thom Hogans Sansmirror, find the quote at http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/canon-announces-eos-m.html

    Canon's own positioning included this line: "...take-anywhere partner for a new breed of enthusiasts who chronicle their lives through images, without necessarily considering themselves to be ‘photographers’."

    I don't think this market really exists, except maybe in the minds of some marketing people.

    You hear photo enthusiasts, on the fora, say that this camera is for people "upgrading" from P&S cameras, but for P&S users, the real upgrade is to a smartphone. PhotoPhanboys have a hard time believing that not everyone is interested in collecting camera gear.

    It will be interesting to see how this camera sells. The fanboys-on-the-fora claim to hate it (although these fanboys may buy the EF-M 'cause of their Canon fandom).

    BTW did you see the spread in Sports Illustrated shot with an iPhone/Instagra combo ?? 8-0


  11. I think that Canon are playing it safe. Release a basic body to start off, to appeal to all the P&S users looking to trade up, then eventually flesh out their EOS-M system with several models, just like Olympus with their E-PM1, E-PL3, E-P3 and OM-D. Existing Canon shooters will be able to use their EF and EF-S lenses with an adapter which will be available at launch, and there are all the advantages of a larger sensor as well (this is the biggest drawback of Micro Four Thirds, IMO, and this from someone who owns an Olympus E-P3 and several lenses and accessories). Once the entire Canon EOS-M line-up is out, the system will be a very strong contender, stronger than the Sony NEX, which is still struggling to bring out new lenses, two years later.

    This is only the first shot across the bow, from Canon. Things are about to get very interesting (and very good for us photographers) indeed! :)

    1. This product should have hit the market at $600. Then it would have been competitive. Moms and dads will vote with their checkbooks. Enthusiast will vote based on capability. The reality is that $599 seems to be the price point that caps out for P&S upgraders.

    2. The Nikon V1 has only been out for 6 months, and its price has dropped from (roughly) $1000 to $750, with the kit zoom.

      Don't know if they planned it that way from the start, or lowered the price because the camera's not selling.

      Maybe Canon's $800 includes the "early adopter" penalty.

  12. I think Canon got this camera perfect for the US consumer market, where almost everyone thinks a "big body" dslr turns them into a "pro". While a small camera, no matter how crappy, is for "amateurs".
    I'll bet in a year's time that will be the only market where it is selling.

    Meanwhile, those with half a brain and/or minimal knowledge of professional ir serious amateur photography will continue to select mirrorless system cameras with EVFs and in-body image stabilisation: any claim that's not the future is just twisted marketing...

    1. I'm in the US. While DSLRs may dominate the market at this point, I don't know anyone who equates a "big body" with being a "pro" photographer. I'm not even sure most people would know the differences between "big" and "not big" cameras anyway.

      BTW, where I live local camera stores sell mirrorless cameras, and sales staff tell me that cameras, such as the EM-5, are selling briskly. But it's going to take some time for MILC to make substantial penetration of the marketplace. The economic downturn of the last few years hasn't helped any in this respect.

      Give it time, and MILC will make headway.


  13. My 2 cts, for what it's worth.
    "Canon missed the whole point"... But not by much.
    Look, we all know this is the first cam, with another, better sepcified body, coming along in probably only a few months (Photokina anyone ?). The have the muscle to do it, easy as pie.
    Second, I personally, as a high end DLSR and m4/3 (equally high end) user, would have bought this camera. No VF ? I must like stinky diapers. Tongue in cheek, but not so much. I did buy the LVF2 for my GX-1... and kind of hate it, it only goes on in VERY bright sun, when nothing else will do. I it is possible at ALL to guess and get a half decent idea of what I'm shooting, it stays in the bag. Two reasons for that. I love the freedom shooting at arm's length have given me after decades of having a big DSLR glued to me face, AND the stealth and inocuity factor is liberating, I look like the tourist after being inevitably tagged the "pro" (which I'm not) because who in their right minds would lug 1D2s along, huh ? Then, I just hate to look into this thing, which tends to scorch my eyeballs even with brightness turned down to match actual lightning.
    So all in all, the lack of EVF (which is coming with next gen, just hold on for one second) doesn't bother me THAT much.
    Controls. Ah ah, guys, get real. Any of you who get the chance to shoot a GX-1 with touchscreen enabled (I guess that'd be true of many other recent Panny products), for the love of God, try it, with an open mind... Frigging brilliant, right ! DPR preview says the M got the best implementation of touchscreen features to date, and knowing how lovely Panny's is, that says a lot. Why Canon didn't allow the REC buttont to be customized in stills mode is beyond me, but that could be addressed by a later firmware. I'm not panicking. PLus, my S90's controls NEVER got in my way during the 3 years I've had it (an eternity in digital) and the numerous trips it's been on. I doubt not the M will be an enjoyable camera to shoot.
    APS-C is obviously a great, great asset to the cam. Clean ISO's, for those who need them (I don't) and YES, more DOF control for the obsessive shallow DOF nuts like me, who DO see a REAL difference in their pics vs X2 m4/3 crop factor. Thank you.
    Ability to use EF/EF-S lenses is of course the great fun factor here, the more options the better. Stick the native, smaller lenses for portability, get out the big guns for fun when IQ is your primary concern, and voilĂ  ! You have a smart "system".
    Price. Overpriced. Biggie ? Nah...I wouldn't be the LEAST surprised that actual price actually drops even BEFORE the cam starts shipping, and very quickly so shortly after. Again, no issue.
    Kirk (and all m4/3 devotees), please let's be lucid about the anything else than E-M5 Oly sensors... They just don't cut it !! The "old" 12MP that is shared by the whole line-up except the newer OM-D is pretty lame by today's standards... I tried two models to shoot along my GX-1, which they couldn't hold a candle to (in any area, for that matter), and both promptly when back on the used market (rapidly taken off my hands, thank God). Of course we know Oly is about to update its Pen line with the new chip very soon, but for an IQ concerned Canon user as of today, it makes MORE sense to pre-order the M than to go with any of the Oly Pens.
    SO, is it really brilliant after all ?
    No, actually, it sucks, big time. The AF, friends, the AF. From the (several) hands-on videos available, it's infamous. And the ONE reason my unit is gonna stay on the shelf.
    Try again, Canon, some mirrorless have freaking good AF (albeit AF-S), and that's not an area in which I'm giving up any performance.

  14. Kirk, are you predicting that this camera will be a commercial failure or that the people who will buy it are ignorant/stupid?

    The world is full of things that I won't buy but others find to be useful and good value for the money and I'm sure that the same is true for you. But that doesn't mean that either of us has some deep insight not shared by the world in general.

    With respect to the viewfinder, Canon's G series has always had a viewfinder. I used mine once and found that the view was hard to find -- the lens obscured part of it -- so I ended up using only the LCD. Not a big deal. And as for " ... the growing legion of photographers who have figured out just how great EVFs are ... " the world is full of iPhone owners/users that have never seen an EVF. Perhaps this is Canon's target market.

    And maybe this is just Canon's first release in a series of mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras -- it's pretty costly to develop a new series of lenses that can be used on only one camera.

    In any case, the body colors are nice.

  15. It is pretty much obvious how the new world order is going to look like soon:
    1. Smartphone for basic
    2. Sony rx100 for small HQ
    3. FF mirrorless for enthusiasts
    4. DSLR/MF for pro
    Anything else including this Canon soap bar is a waste of effort and funds

  16. Canon just banking on their name because the camera itself is sure not going to attract discriminating buyers.

  17. When you think how much business Canon must have lost over the last few years due to CSC cameras you would have thought that when they finally launched their own system they would have hit the ball firmly out of the park.

    Seems they couldn't even SEE the ball never mind actually HIT it!

  18. No question Canon played it safe. This is no challenge to dSLR sales! I don't get the price point, it doesn't offer anything over the G1X (which at least has IS) except EF lens compatibility (but photographers owning a large base of lenses would not seem to be the target audience). It is like they didn't pay attention to the last four years of Olympus/Panasonic offerings!

  19. My favorite part... "the dirty baby diaper camera hold"

  20. Well, without looking at the price and the current mirroless market, the camera is almost ok actually. Except it misses
    1) an evf option
    2) a few more direct controls/dials
    3) a decent AF

    It feels more like a mirrorless camera from 2010, but priced WAY above its market point. Did Canon looked at what the other brands are selling ? It s already not a competitive offering right now ... the next wave of Pen cameras and nex is going to kill it completely.

    My personal theory is that Canon does not care about the consumer market anymore, and certainly even less about photography. They just want to sells pro cameras, L glasses and stuff for video. That's where the margins are. They will continue to release poor consumer offerings for a premium based on their reputation and market share until they can make any profit, and stop after that.

  21. I have been looking for a workshop that teaches the "Dirty Diaper". Maybe someone could do do the One Light Dirty Diaper for the new EOS-M users.

  22. This camera is just a rehash of Canon P&S cameras that they've producing for years. Does anyone at Canon believe in innovation or have all the smart ones gone over to the dark side - Video cameras?

    For a $100 less you can have a Nikon D5200 with 14bit RAW.

  23. With respect to Canon being late to market …

    In the past couple of years, Canon has introduced S95, S100, G12, G1-X, (and I don’t know how many low priced point and shoot cameras), EOS 1D X, EOS 5D MkIII, EOS 7D, EOS 60Da, T4i, several lenses (DSLR and Cinema), Speedlite 600EX-RT, some number of camcorders, and the EOS C300 and EOS C500 cinema cameras. The engineers were busy.

    The cinema system is completely new to Canon, was a huge engineering effort and will likely have greater financial impact to Canon than the EOS-M.

  24. Within these corporation, the different product groups are actually competing against each for funding and commitment. You can bet that the EOS M team was working with a gun to their head. I wonder if these guys were allowed to build the camera they really wanted to...

  25. I don't chime in here often - I'm just a photography enthusiast, albeit for 60 years now. But I must agree with Mr. Tuck. My main system is Canon-based, and I had hoped Canon would produce a mirrorless compact with an electronic viewfinder. I kept waiting, but this year I ran out of patience and bought an Olympus E-PL2 and an EVF, which stays mounted on the body. I have a Canon S95, but unless I'm indoors, I always carry a Hoodman 1X loupe so I can compose in bright light and have a three-point hold on the camera for enhanced stability.

  26. I'm not exactly sure why, but Kirk's post and all of these responses remind me of something I once read from the words of a very wise man:

    "When you separate the way buying into a tribe and buying tribal status from the business equation of adequate equipment acquisition you free yourself from the tyranny of marketing and branding and make decisions that are rational and leave you more time and energy to use your camera for it's intended purpose....not popularity contests and tribal acceptance......actually taking photographs. If only I were wise enough to take my own advice."

    You can read the rest of it here:


    1. Let's try another varient of that link:


  27. Pentax did this months ago, and even though the Pentax body style of the K-01 doesn't suit my particular tastes, I have yet to show it to a teenage male (I have sons that age) who didn't like it. At least it's eye-catching. I am surprised that Canon would come out with almost the same thing as Pentax so many months later, but more boring looking.

  28. Yes, very safe or rather cowardly move of Canon. If they introduced a prosumer camera with the same specs but with an EVF, manual controls and articulating screen they would kill all other mirrorless cameras with one shot. An their own Rebels as well :)

  29. As a long time Canon user, this camera was one big yawn. My 5dmkII and all the L glass are still with me, but this release just validated my decision to gamble on the Olympus OMD as my choice for a mirrorless. The 25mm 1.4 Pany Leica delivers a smile with every frame, as does holding and using the OMD. Im a two system guy for now, but if this keeps up.....it's m43 all the way. Just printing my first choices from the OMD and from what I'm seeing, Canon is running out of time to "get it". EVF rocks!!!!!

  30. I am fully invested in M43. Have the OMD and all the prime lenses except the 75mm. I will take delivery tomorrow. The OMD IQ is hard to beat. I do not think any crop sensor will offer more. The only thing that would persuade me to move on to a new system would be a FF sensor with EVF.

  31. Ken Rockwell has pronounced the new Canon mirrorless as, "The World's first serious mirrorless camera." I rest my case.

  32. What?....there was a Canon mirrorless announced? I didn't notice. I've been too busy having fun with my Oly E-M5 :-) I didn't realize how much I'd like the E-M5...

    1. Hahaha, I know. Did I laugh hard when I saw that yesterday. :-)

      Mind he still insists on ever refusing to test & review a Leica as it is 1/2 frame in his book. 1.3x crop, the new Ken Rockwell 1/2 frame standard. Always good fora giggle is Ken mind.

    2. Sorry Jon - This was meant to be posted above Kirk's post above yours.

  33. It would be something if it was optimized to shoot in black & white only (preferably tri-x)...like the Leica Monochrome...then it would be tempting.

  34. Kirk.... I think you really nailed it. Here's my take:

    I think Canon really missed a golden opportunity here. Being the last one to enter the market Canon actually had an advantage. They could have learned from everyone elses mistakes. Instead, they took the lazy way out by essentially copying a three year old Olynmpus E-P1 (No EVF, no way to connect an optional EVF, no flash) and priced it like it was a Pentax K5.

    This camera gets my vote for the most anticipated, and most underwelming camera of the year. And we still have five months to go.

    They will still sell a lot of these, because there are so many Canon users who want to use their EOS lenses on a smaller body. But Canon blew the chance to go head to head with the best MILC cameras made today. I'm really disappointed.

  35. Kirk, well said.

    Canon tiptoed into the mirrorless market with this one, not much of a splash that way.

    I agree with most points above, except I don't think that many Canon users will want to spend this much money on the EOS M to use with their lenses. The smaller camera body size is immaterial when you put a moderate sized lens on it. I believe it becomes much more difficult to hand hold one of these at arm's length with a 70-200 lens on it. (The photo of that combo on dpreview makes it look like a buttplug. :-)

    The only possible appeal for me would be this camera with the 22mm lens on it, but that's not appealing enough. I'd still rather have something with an EVF (like a Pan-G3) and a pancake lens, and for a little less money and a lot more control.

    And here's my commentary on this news: http://www.nabityphotos.com/Photoblog/?p=776

  36. Their attempt to halt the flow of customers into the m43 market strikes me as both cynical and dumb. Cynical because by trying to keep it EOS and sell you an extra adapter (why the heck isn't it in the box?) they're trying to make Canon shooters stay with them. Dumb because the lack of EVF (it's the choice of being able one to use that matters here) and a screen that doesn't tilt means that strapping on your big EF lenses utterly limits your shooting options. I'm sure it will sell plenty, there's lots of people with more brand loyalty than sense out there, but I doubt it'll be showing up at the camera behind any truly great images any time soon...

  37. Why is it so hard to accept that Canon might not be targeting the "MUST-USE-A-VIEWFINDER-OR-ELSE-YOU'RE-NOT-A-PHOTOGRAPHER" crowd?

    While this is not the camera I hoped for and, thus, not the camera for me, Canon didn't design it for me (or you, Kirk!). I don't think we can say they "missed the point" when their point is to sell as many cameras as possible, as opposed to selling a few thousand cameras to those who only shoot 8x10 transparency film because they're "serious photographers."

    I can absolutely see handing this camera to my wife who is the furthest thing from a photographer while on vacation, and then grabbing a few snaps myself while I'm enjoying time with my family vs. being strapped to my "serious camera."

  38. As I've said elsewhere, there's not a great deal of point to Canon coming out fighting when they've only got two native lenses to sell. That said, I think they coud have done better than reinventing the E-P1.

  39. As I've said elsewhere, there's not a great deal of point to Canon coming out fighting when they've only got two native lenses to sell. That said, I think they coud have done better than reinventing the E-P1.

  40. A gear post sure pushes a lot of buttons doesn't it?

    My 2cents is that I am sure glad you are saying a camera without a viewfinder (standard or optional) is a poor excuse for a serious camera because when ever I put forth the same proposition I get an earful of flame.

  41. This is the preview photo that made me laugh when I saw it. I thought, "Right, I'll just hold this little compact camera out in front of me and snap a few shots."


  42. I'll take the Nikon V1 any day. View finder and an AF like lightning. Yes the Canon would have better IQ, but if I wanted the better IQ as you say the G1X is the better buy.

    Right now the only APS-C mirrorless with a decent amount of small primes aside from Fuji is Pentax. Sadly Pentax didn't include an EVF. If the next Pentax can AF and has an EVF, I'd take that over the Fuji.

  43. Totally agree with you Kirk. This kind of stuff is driving me away from Canon and toward Sony and/or Olympus everyday.

  44. I botched my post the first day this article appeared. I was then generally dismissive noting the commander function with the popup flash but lamenting the lack of EVF. But tonight, after a beer, I read through dpreview's preview and to my surprise I liked what I read and saw. The darn camera is kind of cute and it does have readily accessible controls via the touchscreen. Being a long time Olympus fan, I early discovered the value in the rear LCD display of directly accessible controls. With the touchscreen that seals the deal. I would consider this (I use an E-PL2 w/EVF regularly, so I'll pass for now) strongly if I were in the small system mirrorless market.

    What I really want next is Sony's successor to the SLT-a65! So I double disqualify myself (and ashamed after Kirk's post on the foolishness of camera lust this past evening)!

  45. Unfortunately you don't have a photography and marketing experience. This camera has same sensor as One of the best VDSLR Canon 7D plus digic 5 processor and you can mount any canon lens. There is no comparison with GX1. GX1 is P&S camera. Besides you can't jump into a new market with pro camera. Canon did the right job and they will release more advanced cameras in the future for sure. Besides NO ONE test this camera yet. Reviewing camera based on a specs without testing is unprofessional.

  46. Jamescuneyt, Well, well, well. I think I do have the experience you are suggesting. But that's neither here nor there. No one is saying that the sensor in the EOS-M isn't groovy and everything every Canon photographer could ever want. I'm just saying that it's a stupid intro to the mirrorless space, stupidly done and not appealing for advanced amateurs, professionals and other people who care about handling and feature sets. I didn't review the camera, I wrote about its feature set (or lack thereof). I can look at the sticker in the window of a new car and know for sure that I'm not interesting is a car that isn't air conditioned and only gets five miles to the gallon. If you can't make some decisions based on the published specifications of a product you might not be the sharpest lens in the bag...

  47. Though "it is a Canon EOS" :-) I have my doubts.

    If you already have lots of EOS lenses, you might consider the EOS-M as smaller, secondary body.
    But then you have to use the adapter AND the large EOS lenses.
    Benefit in size/weight? Minor.

    In a way this is similar to the NEx with their adapter to use the Minolta-Sony/Alpha mount lenses. But then, there are already quite a lot of NEX lenses available.

    If you come from the P&S or Iphone section, why choose the EOS-M apart from the brand name, when there are so many alternatives?

    On top of that, the price! I find it hard to believe, -IF- I would want to buy a Canon camera, why I should opt for the EOS-M instead of an Rebel-kit with zoom for 200 $ less?

    Let's wait and see...


Comments. If you disagree do so civilly. Be nice or see your comments fly into the void. Anonymous posters are not given special privileges or dispensation. If technology alone requires you to be anonymous your comments will likely pass through moderation if you "sign" them. A new note: Don't tell me how to write or how to blog!