I did a quick size comparison between some of the smallest cameras from Micro 4/3 (2X crop), Sony NEX (1.5X crop), and the new Canon EOS-M (1.6X crop) using the excellent services of CameraSize.com:












Most of the lenses can be easily identified from the images. The fourth group down shows the GF5 with the diminutive Panasonic 14mm f/2.5, while the fifth group down substitutes the slightly chunkier Panasonic 20mm f/1.7.

__________________
Amin
Mu-43.com Webmaster (Site FAQ | Help Forum | My Disclosures | My Flickriver | My G+ Profile)

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates. We get a small referral fee when you buy after clicking our link. Your price is unaffected.

That's an interesting comparison. It's curious that NEX chose to increase the size on the F3 (my C3 is a good deal smaller), also that Zeiss 24/1.8 is pretty big (but nice). In case anyone is interested the equivalent focal lengths you're looking at are...

ROW 1
body only

ROW 2/3
EOS-M - 29-88/3.5-5.6
E-PM1 - 28-84/3.5-5.6
GF5 - 28-84/3.5-5.6
NEX F3 - 27-82.5/3.5-5.6

ROW 4
EOS-M - 33/2
E-PM1 - 34/2.8
GF5 - 28/2.5
NEX F3 - 24/2.8

ROW 5
EOS-M - 33/2
E-PM1 - 34/2.8
GF5 - 40/1.7
NEX F3 - 36/1.8

Though the NEX system is often knocked for its size, and for the supposed mismatching of lens to body-size, this comparison seems to show that, at least in several of the possible combinations, there just really isn't much difference.

Absolutely right. See also: Mirrorless Camera Size Comparison: NEX5, NX10, E-P2, E-PL1, GF1, G2

__________________
Amin
Mu-43.com Webmaster (Site FAQ | Help Forum | My Disclosures | My Flickriver | My G+ Profile)

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates. We get a small referral fee when you buy after clicking our link. Your price is unaffected.

Canon has done a nice job of shrinking the camera down and has posed a challenge to m43. However the proof, as they say, is in the pudding (or at least the images of the pudding). I suspect the color and sharpness to be excellent in the middle, but the edges are going to be a challenge.

__________________
Pax,
Richard
--------------
I hate cameras. They are so much more sure than I am about everything. ~John Steinbeck

To make the comparison really accurate, you'd need to stick the accessory flash on top of the camera.

But for me, the issue with the Canon isn't size. It's how limited this particular camera / system is, today. No EVF option, no built-in flash, and only 2 lenses. Yes, I know all about the adapter. $200, on top of an already pretty pricey camera for what promises to be pretty poor af performance doesn't impress me. I can get slow AF with legacy lenses a lot cheaper on m43. :)

Yes, maybe this is only the opening salvo, and this time next year maybe there will be a body to compete with the GX-1 / Pen E-P5 or OM-D / GH3 and 4 more good lenses. Maybe. But today the -M is all we have, and it seems to fall short in a price / features comparison.

Did I mention price? $800 with the pancake + $150 for a flash puts it in the same price range as an OM-D, and more expensive than every other m43 camera. That's close to twice the price of m43 cameras with similar features. If you assume people will buy this because they have other Canon lenses, add $200. $1150 is some serious cash.

__________________
I'm not lazy. I'm energy efficient.

OTOH, there are these:

Compact Camera Meter



Yes, there are some compact lenses for NEX, but there are also some that are mind-bogglingly big, for their focal length, when compared to the body, especially the C3 body. That 50mm, for example, looks to be bigger than the 50 f/1.8 for the FF EOS. Sony's reputation for large lenses relative to body size isn't unearned.

__________________
I'm not lazy. I'm energy efficient.

Now, this is a much better comparison than the flickr image, heh.

Why?

I'm guessing the 3:2 ratio within the image circle?

__________________
E-M5 | M. Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 | Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8

Flickr