At last, the EOS M has been announced for first outing at Photokina!

I couldn't find another thread for it. Mods - delete this if there is one already.

You're the first. Good catch.

Here is the Canon USA link:

http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/p...m_22mm_stm_kit

This appears to use a similar imager to the Canon 7D, 60D, T2i/T3i/T4i in that it supports the same maximum resolution. A major difference is the addition of specialized center pixels used for passive, phase-difference AF, similar to the FujiFilm sensors with a similar capability.

This "hybrid" AF should allow the passive TTL-CT-SIR AF to do the major "steering" of autofocus, the same as in current Canon dSLRs, but then the "contrast detect AF", typical of P&S bodies, should allow fine tuning of the AF and low-light AF (although more slowly).

Significant is that this body allows the use of a compatible flash with an AF Assist light with a projected, patterned light, and this body uses the AF Assist light of the flash instead of its own AF Assist light. This is unusual for mirrorless camera designs and may significantly improve low light AF performance. It will take both professional reviews as well as user reviews and user accounts of performance to know the true qualities of this new AF system. Some sites are comparing this to the 31 zone "FlexiZone" system of the Canon T4i. While the EOS M, AF system is also called "FlexiZone", it will be interesting to see if they are one-and-the-same.

Shutter design appears to be from the EOS dRebel series, with 1/200th x-sync and 1/4000th maximum shutter speed. I do not see FP/HSS flash support (sadly).

Edit: There is no built-in flash for the EOS M. If you want/need flash you must use an external flash, but it appears that any of the Canon "EX" series flashes will do. Hopefully, the body may be compatible with third-party Canon E-TTL compatible flashes too.

This looks really interesting. I thought DPreview's preview of this ended with an odd statement:

"The flipside of this, of course, is that the EOS M may not set pulses racing for enthusiast users looking for a more compact camera to use alongside their Canon SLRs (but then again, it's not really supposed to - that's the Powershot G1 X's job). "

As I was reading this, I thought to myself: Finally a pocket camera I can take with my 40D or perhaps even instead of the 40D. Same sensor, electronics, and lenses. No need to buy or carry around additional lenses, just use what I have.

What am I missing here that says the G1X is more suitable than this camera?

It is odd that my S100 offers more direct manual controls than this camera. No PASM dial is an insult. I'd like to see that plus an aperture dial, shutter speed dial and/or an exposure compensation dial, and an ISO button. Maybe another body is in the works.

I think it's weird that it has no manual controls AND no flash. Usually no manual controls means a camera is intended for the automatic p&s market, where a flash is appreciated if not required.

I don't need a VF.

Also I will wait until more fast pancake primes are available before considering a Canon mirrorless, as they are the only lenses worth using on such a camera. The bulky zooms make the camera no more portable than a Rebel.

Or give me this body with a flush built-in 22mm f/2.0 lens like the Fuji X100. Or I'd like to see an S version of the G1X.

It does seem strange that the G1X appears to have more manual controls than the EOS M EF-M. (And what is it with these names? It sounds like they're trying to copy the alphabet soup that is the Olympus om-d em5.)

BUT I'd like to see the touch screen in action to get a better feel for what this camera can/can't do. A lens roadmap would be nice too.

Originally Posted by cmason This looks really interesting. I thought DPreview's preview of this ended with an odd statement: "The flipside of this, of course, is that the EOS M may not set pulses racing for enthusiast users looking for a more compact camera to use alongside their Canon SLRs (but then again, it's not really supposed to - that's the Powershot G1 X's job). " As I was reading this, I thought to myself: Finally a pocket camera I can take with my 40D or perhaps even instead of the 40D. Same sensor, electronics, and lenses. No need to buy or carry around additional lenses, just use what I have. What am I missing here that says the G1X is more suitable than this camera?

You're not missing anything but I think that the author of that pre-review misstated his thoughts.

My recommendation is to go with the Canon T4i/650D for a smaller and lighter body which still has crisp AF and compatibility with EF and EF-S lenses. It's only a little more base cost, but by the time you add the lens converter to the EOS M the prices are very similar. There is no guarantee that the converter+EF (or EF-S) lens combination on the EOS M will even be acceptably fast to focus.

Sure, the EOS M is smaller and shorter, but the lens diameters are no smaller (per equivalent lens) and the lenses are only a bit shorter. Plus the EF-M lenses will not fit any of the Canon dSLRs, so a truly more compact kit using the EOS M needs its dedicated lenses.

The T4i/650D seems best to preserve lens compatibility, keeps FP/HSS flash as an option, allows a lot more images per battery charge, optical viewfinder, articulated LCD, and it's still very reasonable in price.

Originally Posted by MarkR And what is it with these names? It sounds like they're trying to copy the alphabet soup that is the Olympus om-d em5.

Perhaps Canon has finally decided the US market can use the same model names as in all other world markets, rather than "kiddie" names such as "Rebel" which are more suited to such manufacturers as Mattel and Fisher-Price!

Originally Posted by W.W. Webster Perhaps Canon has finally decided the US market can use the same model names as in all other world markets, rather than "kiddie" names such as "Rebel" which are more suited to such manufacturers as Mattel and Fisher-Price!

Never understood, for the most part, different model names for different markets. I'm still not sure if my pocket camera is a Samsung TL500 or a Samsung EX1.

And Pentax, for a while, was trying to put a "*" in front of their camera names: *ist D. How do you pronounce that again?

At least there is no "x" in the name. Between the Panasonic GX1, and the Canon G1X, plus the Fuji X10, X100, X-1 Pro, (or is it the X-Pro 1?), I'm totally confused.

Agree there is no dial to manage the settings, but it is fully manual, just done via the touchscreen. I will hold my thoughts on the touchscreen until I use it, but it looks quite slick and usable. Check out the video:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/23/31...iew/in/2941330

Cool stuff, I want someone to post a pic for us showing it mounted on a 800mm f/5.6 L IS and 680 EX w/Flashextender ;)

I'd love something like this as a dedicated wide angle low light setup. However, I wouldn't want to have to take my eye off my subject to change any manual settings while trying to see the LCD display... that's a big negative IMHO. I'd rather wait for the next model when they realize touchscreen only is a really bad idea. And, can it tell the difference between your nose smashing the screen and your fingers?

Originally Posted by Overfocused ... And, can it tell the difference between your nose smashing the screen and your fingers?

Not sure why your nose would ever be that close to the screen. Are you thinking that there is a viewfinder?

I agree that for any serious use a touchscreen only interface for setup is somewhat limiting.

Originally Posted by ziggy53 Not sure why your nose would ever be that close to the screen. Are you thinking that there is a viewfinder? I agree that for any serious use a touchscreen only interface for setup is somewhat limiting.

Er, whoops. Yeah assumption of viewfinder

I double don't want it now, lol

After buying a Sony Nex3 and not having a view finder, to then buying a Sony Nex7 with view finder, the difference is night and day.

It looks like Canon is starting out where Sony did some 2 years or so ago.

Another new lens mount, another type of battery, and another camera with an 18MP sensor.
Did Canon shut down their chip making plant, or maybe just their R&D.
Can they not come up with something other than an 18MP Chip?
Why do we have to go into custom functions to "expand" the ISO range? Just put it all there under ISO.

Last question, why do you make a lens (that I'm guessing is only going to fit on this camera) that is labeled 22mm, but in the real world will act like a 35mm lens,
why wouldn't you just call it a 35mm lens? Why do we have to go through the extra step of figuring out what lens equivalent is?

Same thing with EF-S. It's ridiculous. Label it correctly.

It doesn't even have an on board flash.

I think this camera will fail. It offers nothing but a chance to spend money on a new system that does nothing better than a camera that is already in place, that will use any EF lens without an adapter.

As Ziggy said, one of the Rebels will give you much more than this camera will.

(yeah, I'm in a bit of a mood tonight)

Originally Posted by davev Can they not come up with something other than an 18MP Chip?

This will not be the only body. This is only the first body in a new mount system, and it is aimed at the amateur enthusiast. I expect a more advanced body to follow in the not so distant future, with proper manual controls. Maybe by then they will figure out how to make a new APS-C chip, but I will never need more than 18mp in a compact camera. Actually I hope the next one is 16mp or less.

Last question, why do you make a lens (that I'm guessing is only going to fit on this camera) that is labeled 22mm, but in the real world will act like a 35mm lens, why wouldn't you just call it a 35mm lens? Why do we have to go through the extra step of figuring out what lens equivalent is? Same thing with EF-S. It's ridiculous. Label it correctly.

This is like saying Full Frame SLR owners should refer to a 50mm lens as an 80mm lens, because in the real world it will act like an 80mm lens on Medium Format.

Physically it's a 22mm lens and that is that. Marketers have decided that people think in terms of the 135 format, so they will describe it as "35mm effective". This makes sense because there are so many different format sizes these days.

As Ziggy said, one of the Rebels will give you much more than this camera will.

Personally, 10 years ago I would have bought this camera. Would have been a lot easier to throw in the diaper bag.

MOD EDIT: I removed the quote from the banned user because it contained four hidden spam links

Don't think so. The EOS-M and S100 are not targeted at the same people, and frankly, the EOS-M is not targeted at anyone on this board. Canon is really going for the P&S crowd, probably offering a camera that does what a superzoom does, but with more ability to 'upgrade' lenses,etc. See the Canon quote below regarding it being a camera for videographers:

"...reps were careful to note what the EOS M is, and what it isn't. In the US, the company is positioning the EOS M as a video-first camera, designed to be something of a companion tool for videographers and cinematographers much the same way the G1 X is designed for pro shooters who want something smaller than their DSLR. Since it lacks a viewfinder, reps said, it doesn't provide the same still photography experience as a camera like the T4i. Without the controls and ergonomics of a DSLR, it's also not as fast to operate. Canon's not even calling the EOS M a "mirrorless camera," lest buyers be confused into thinking it's a NEX or Micro Four Thirds competitor.

Though the camera's clearly capable of the same functionality as a NEX-F3 or an Olympus OM-D E-M5, Canon imagines a different user, one much more focused on video. If you want to step up from a point-and-shoot, reps said, buy a T4i. To that end, the EOS M will only be sold in specialty stores like B&H, where there's more guidance for camera buyers. Canon's clearly worried about cannibalizing its own products — the G1 X, T4i, and even S100 all share some key features with the EOS M." Verge

It should not be too long before Canon releases the camera you want. On the other hand, having many of the benefits of a S100, with the option to use my existing lenses and flash is very appealing. Frankly, I don't want to fiddle with Manual on a tiny camera...thats what I have my dSLR for. If I bring out something like the EOS M, I am more interested in the convenience, (at the best possible quality) than the fiddly bits.

Originally Posted by davev Last question, why do you make a lens (that I'm guessing is only going to fit on this camera) that is labeled 22mm, but in the real world will act like a 35mm lens, why wouldn't you just call it a 35mm lens? Why do we have to go through the extra step of figuring out what lens equivalent is?

Because at 22mm it IS LABELLED CORRECTLY. You are confusing the focal length of the lens, a physical parameter the has no concern whatsoever with the sensor size the image is hitting, with the field of view of the lens and sensor combination. Calling an EF-M 22mm lens a 35mm lens is just flat wrong.

There is no escaping the fact that the field of view you get is a combination of lens focal length and sensor size. Lens focal length alone will never tell the full story. Don't believe me? Then grab a medium format camera with a 50mm lens and see what the "lens equivalent" is. :)

Originally Posted by mercphoto Because at 22mm it IS LABELLED CORRECTLY. You are confusing the focal length of the lens, a physical parameter the has no concern whatsoever with the sensor size the image is hitting, with the field of view of the lens and sensor combination. Calling an EF-M 22mm lens a 35mm lens is just flat wrong. There is no escaping the fact that the field of view you get is a combination of lens focal length and sensor size. Lens focal length alone will never tell the full story. Don't believe me? Then grab a medium format camera with a 50mm lens and see what the "lens equivalent" is. :)

For example:

I have a Pentax D FA 100mm lens.

On a K1000 it has an equivelant FL of 100mm.
On my K5, it is 150mm.
If I mounted it to a 4/3 camera with an adapter, it would be 200mm.
If I mounted it to a Pentax Q (!) with adapter, it would be a 550mm.

It makes sense to give 35mm equivelants to lenses that are permanently mounted to the cameras, at least for comparison purposes. Makes less sense for a lens that might be mountable on different bodies.

The new lenses for the EOS-M are APS-C lenses, as they have the exact same light circle as do the EF-S lenses. Where they are different is in the distance between the last lens element and the sensor: they can be 'thinner' here, because there is no mirror to worry about. These particular lenses are STM focusing, which is a bit different. In addition, it appears Canon made them much narrower, and therefore harder to hand control, as they do not expect them to be manually focused.