Canon Mirrorless

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by meyerweb, Jul 19, 2012.

  1. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    A couple of hours ago, 43rumors and mirrorless rumors posted a blurry pic of what was purported to be Canon's MILC. (excuse me: DSLM). Then they pulled it.

    The lens on it had the look of Canon, the body was quite thin. Overall, it had the look of the NEX, with a real thin body and a too big lens.

    I don't know if it was real, or why they pulled it. But if it accurately reflected the proportions of Canon's effort, I'm not interested. Sony NEX all over again (but maybe with a better line up of lenses down the road.)
  2. troll

    troll Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 25, 2012
    I'm not sure what you mean exactly about "too big lenses".. Zeiss 24 1.8 is 224g, just 24 extra grams compared to Panasonic 25/1.4. Sony 50/1.8 is 202g which is 86 grams heavier than Olympus 45/1.8, but Sony's got OIS... Sony 18-55 is 194g which is the same as Panasonic 14-45, and Sony 55-210 is 343g, which is in between the heavier Panasonic 45-200 and lighter 45-175. Sony's NEX camera with in-built viewfinder is lighter than anything in mft range (with EVF).

    Basically you can have a camera (NEX-7) with 2 primes (24, 50) and 2 zooms (18-55, 55-210) weighing ~ the same as an mft camera with built-in EVF with two primes (25, 45) and 2 zooms (14-45, 45-175/200). Yet with Sony you get better image quality, but the size and weight are roughly the same.

    The problem of NEX system is the lack of lenses, not the size and weight.
  3. pheaukus

    pheaukus Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 22, 2012
  4. krugorg

    krugorg Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 18, 2011
    Minnesota USA
    I agree with you that the big issue with NEX is that is seems to be lacking in lenses - in quantity and quality.

    But there is really a size difference. Grams add up and there is even a bigger difference in volume. You can measure against the 25/1.4, but that is one of the chunkier m4/3 lenses.

    We have had this discussion way too many time, I know. I will say, though, that I am always checking out NEX (and interested in the Canon also)... just hasn't made sense for me to invest in a body, before the lenses are there (especially since the new body versions come out every year).

  5. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 7, 2010
    This was just posted on POTN, supposedly from a Chinese photography site:


    Link to thread
  6. PiterM

    PiterM Mu-43 Regular

    Jul 22, 2011
    Just posted on Canon Watch:

    • Like Like x 4
  7. dtchan

    dtchan Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 24, 2010
    The lens look decent but the camera looks soooooooooooo ugly. Uglier than p&s.
  8. jyc860923

    jyc860923 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 28, 2012
    Shenyang, China
    Real Name:
    what about the flange distance if using the EOS lens on the pocketable mirrorless?
  9. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Real Name:
    The perspective on this pic is completely wrong. Where is the EVF fitted? Or there is no EVF? Lens size also looks smaller than it should be, IMHO.

    Very blunt looking, but then again this isn't the main issue.
  10. smartwombat

    smartwombat Mu-43 Regular

    Jul 16, 2012
    Flange distance is no issue with the right adaptor.
    Power demand of EF or EF-S lenses is more likely to be a problem.
  11. jyc860923

    jyc860923 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 28, 2012
    Shenyang, China
    Real Name:
    Yeah but the picture shows no adaptor, is it a fake picture or is it a native mirrorless lens?

    Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk 2
  12. troll

    troll Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 25, 2012
    That's a native lens (EF-M).
  13. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    The main issue, frankly, is the Canon sensor.
  14. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Real Name:
    What's wrong with the Canon sensor? Just curious.
  15. Pennington

    Pennington Mu-43 Regular

    Granted, we don't have all the facts yet, but based on what we can see about the EOS-M, I can't say I'm impressed. It definitely looks like more of a super-consumer body than anything else. Funny shape, possibly limited dials, and no EVF (at least no built-in).

    What I will be interested to see is the pricing, both for the body and the lens. Part of the reason I left Canon for m4:3 is because I felt their pricing structure had become outrageous.
  16. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin .

    Oct 9, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Real Name:
    Hopefully the price of the new EF 40mm pancake gives some indication of the likely pricing of the basic prime lens.
  17. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Real Name:
    One more indication that Canon is initially after two major market segments: Canon DSLR shooters and general consumer public. I don't know about the EVF though, the leaked "photo" may be misleading.

    There is nothing "wrong" with any sensor in any camera today. It's a fact though, from a strictly technical standpoint, that the 18Mp Canon APS-C sensor is not in the same league as newer Sony sensors (now in several mirrorless and DSLR cameras). It may be adequate for you or me, but not the next guy.
    • Like Like x 2
  18. gsciorio

    gsciorio Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 29, 2011
    Miami, FL
    Which wins for most ugly?

    Canon M

    Nikon V

  19. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    If that's really the camera, it looks like Canon is going for the low-end. That looks like an interchangeable lens P&S. There are no controls on the top at all, and it doesn't look like there's room for an EVF.

    Maybe, like Nikon, they'll have two bodies, and this is the more basic of the two. But it certainly doesn't look like something that will compete with m43, except maybe the E-PM1.
  20. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    This is what I mean by "too big lenses":


    Or this one:


    Yes, there are some small lenses, but the combination of an extremely short flange to sensor distance and large sensor makes such designs difficult. The zooms tend to be huge, way out of proportion to the camera body, and the small wide angles have severe light fall-off towards the edges, especially on the NEX-7. To avoid that light fall-off, you either need a sensor with angled photo site (a la Leica) or retro-focus wide angles, and retro-focus wide angles lose any size advantage.
    • Like Like x 3