" We are not seeing a requirement for EVFs..."

<p>According to <a href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/539156/photokina-2012-canon-cold-on-evf-version-eos-m"><em>Amateur Photographer</em></a>, "<strong>Canon has no plan to incorporate an electronic viewfinder (EVF) in any future EOS M compact system cameras (CSCs) and will not be publishing a ‘roadmap’ of upcoming lenses</strong>." </p>

From my view, Canon is quickly becoming (or has become) irrelevant in that market.

<p>Canon is obviously targeting a segment of the potential sales base ...the diehards who have not learnt to enjoy the EVF. Fortunately there are others making cameras.</p>

<p>[[From my view, Canon is quickly becoming (or has become) irrelevant in that market.]]</p>

<p>Indeed. They've stuck their heads far into the sand and don't appear to be coming out any time soon. I'd love to be proved wrong though. </p>

 

<p>They don't want to do a road map because they want to wait and see what happens to their sales of M cameras (?) - don't blame them, after all there are many EF/EFS lenses out there - its not like there are no lenses to fit on the camera. Don't get the EVF statement, but I don't believe it. They'll put one on if they have to.</p>

<p>If I'm going to bolt a full-size and full-weight EF or EF-S lens on top of an adaptor ($200 at B&H) on top of the EF-M ($800, cheapest kit), why shouldn't I just get a T4i ($770, body only) and get a built-in viewfinder, fast autofocus, and physical controls?<br>

The EF-M is an overpriced, underfeatured, underperforming, unusable-in-sunlight fashion accessory.</p>

<p>Canon is smart. They don't want to alienate their current user base by providing a system that can rival their low end DSLRs. Doing that would make people panic that their DSLR investment is becoming irrelevant. Instead, they have put out a MILC with a reduced feature set that cannot threaten the DSLR products but that they can fall back to as Plan B in case their DSLR market tanks because users want a full-featured MILC system (at which point it is them that want it, so there will be no resentment in developing it). I think they already have a full featured body prepared for Plan B, so they could bring one out in a few months if they wanted to. They understand their users and most of their users don't understand the MILC trend. The EOS-M has good technology around which Canon can build a full featured system if need be. That is not the case for the Nikon 1 or the Pentax Q/K-01 - it is those companies that will end up at the bottom once MILCs take over the market. Canon will come out ahead whatever happens. They'll probably put out some affordable lenses for the EOS-M and then they'll only do high end stuff when they have to. They won't become irrelevant, but they won't lead this transition either.</p>

<p>At least, that's how I read their strategy based on what they are doing.</p>

<p>In the absence of a competitive EVF, I am not seeing a requirement to purchase an EOS-M camera.</p>

<p>without a viewfinder it's just pointless.<br>

hard to say what market it's aimed at, if it is aimed at all</p>

<p>Matt White. I did just that. My T4i cost 780 dollars. I have a NEX5N. It cost 700 dollars with lens but I had to add another 350 dollars for an EVF that does not perform as well as the viewfinder on the T4i particularly in bright light. The live view on the 5N does work significantly better than the Rebel, however. The focusing and actual image capture is better on the Rebel as well as there is a far better lens selection. The 5n sensor is outstanding and I get great pictures. I shoot sports with a 7d and I can use the T4i also. The 5N does not get near as many keepers when I shoot sports even though it gets ten frames per second it only focuses on the first of the ten and it seems to be slightly behind the action in response. What the smaller body is good for is parties and events where it is far more convenient to use. I also have gotten some great landscapes with the 5N. I get good flash results from the NEX but I had to buy a unique Sony flash upgrade at over a hundred bucks to get that quality. The flash is not as capable as Canon external flashes. Still I use the small body a lot. The Sony touch screen converted me and I really like the touchscreen on the Canon. To get back to the EOS M it, as well as the 5N, is a great niche camera but I prefer the DSLR for a full range of uses except where small is more convenient and less visible in use. When it comes to big lenses I prefer a larger body. I will keep the NEX and maybe even upgrade it to the NEX 5R as it appears that Sony has taken on slower reaction times by adding Phase Detect in the focusing process. To get to OPs subject the only way I can see the image in bright light on the Sony is with a state of the art EVF and it certainly does not do that as well as the 7D optical finder. It also helps me frame better than the LCD. The EVF is extremely important on my 5N..</p>

The Nex7's EVF has the additional advantage of having a way to review shot images pretty much full sized in a way that

DSLRs usually don't. To me that is a big advantage. I would thinl the 5n's EVF would have a similar advantage. It's a lot

easier than trying to use a loupe on the LCD screen on the back of a DSLR.

<p>You can also see the exposure change in the NEX EVFs as they are the same in both the 5N and the NEX 7 as you are seeing exactly what the sensor sees. If the EVF is dark the picture will be dark. I also like the full time exposure in the 5N where the camera is constantly metering and the changes show up in the EVF and on the LCD. I think focus peaking which you can also see in the EVF and LCD is a great Sony feature; particularly when the sun is so bright that it is hard to see either in the EVF or the LCD. You can see the peaking and know that your focus is ok when it is hard to see detail. I really like the NEX cameras but I understand their limitations. And as you say David you can enlarge in the EVF to do manual focus. A lot of thought has gone into the NEX cameras. I like the dial settings on the t4i better than struggling through NEX menus although I pretty much know where everything is. This is somewhat mitigated by 5N programmable soft keys if you can remember what you put on which key. I have done a few thousand pictures from the 5N having had it almost a year. However the 100 per cent viewfinder on the 7D and even on the 95% on the t4i are better than the EVF for clarity and instantaneous response. The T4i is not a replacement for my NEX 5N and I no doubt will not shift to the EOS m series.</p>

<p>Olympus has been doing very nicely with their viewfinderless PEN cameras, so maybe Canon have a point. Yes, I know there are optional viewfinders for the PEN cameras but, let's face it, most users seem to be happy using just the screen. Of course we old school SLR users prefer a viewfinder, but there are plenty of young photogs who have never looked through a viewfinder and are probably never likely to.</p>

<p>I also find it quite nauseating to watch youngsters with DSLRs composing and taking every shot using Live View instead of looking through the peep hole. A terrible habit but one which is here to stay. </p>

My Olympus E-PL1 did not become truly usable until I got the EVF for it. Now I would not consider buying a digital

camera without one.

<p>I've been using my E-PL2 without a viewfinder for almost a year now. Works just fine.</p>

I have become much happier using my E-PL2 after I purchased a VF-3, and would not consider an interchangeable lens camera without an EVF or and EVF option. I will agree that it is becoming more commonplace, especially with younger DSLR users, to see them using live view as their primary viewfinder instead of the standard optical viewfinder. With DSLRs that have fully adjustable screens, this is very common. Perhaps Canon knows their market better than I do, but for me, no EVF, no sale.

<p>I've been using a NexC3 with no viewfinder for a while now. I like flipping up the screen and using it as a waist level finder, it's also useful for shooting low to the ground. I gave up with my 40mm f1.4 Nokton though and decided to stick with just the kit zoom although the AF is not always great I like the way it automatically zooms if I grab the manual focus ring. I might try the 30mm Sigma at sometime.</p>

<p>Last time I looked, Olympus does not have any viewfinderless Pen cameras. That ended with the first original digital Pen. After that all have had a port for EVF and they now have two versions of it. Panasonic has a full range with simplest (GF-5) having no EVF and no way to attach one, all others have either port for EVF or a built in EVF. Olympus now has the same with separate EVF in all Pens and the OM-D with fixed EVF. What possible harm can it do to customers to give the option to buy a $200 accessory if you want one? Sony has it. Ricoh has it. Now Leica also has it. I understand Canon's logic, which is a bit like Nikon's but more extreme. Make the mirrorless system so basic and simple that serious photographers don't bother with it, thus not threatening the sales of low end DSLRs. But even serious photographers sometimes need a small camera. And because they are serious, they want good image quality and good controls. And yes, they usually want to see what they are composing.</p>

<p>I have always figured Canon was the least relevant photographic company. This statement does nothing to shake my belief.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Canon was the least relevant photographic company</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I guess that's how it got to be the biggest and most successful...</p>

<p>But even serious photographers sometimes need a small camera. <br /> Both my Canon G9 and G15 have optical viewfinders. 'nuff said.</p>

<p>I have both an EOS-M and a DSLR kit. They are both good systems for what they do, it just takes figuring out if the M will fill a niche you want. For me it was a pocketable camera that I could have with me when/where-ever. My nits about the camera have nothing to do about it having an EVF or not, and its hardly an underperforming camera. I don't get the angst people have about any particular camera not having every feature they desire. My frustration is mostly that Canon isn't supporting this as a 'system' camera, and i think at this point it is clear that Canon isn't interested in the mirrorless segment. That or they are biding their time to release some wundercamera that will blow everyone way. I don't particularly care, the M does mostly what i want it do for, with some idiosyncracies i can live with until i decide what direction I want to go with a mirrorless system.</p>