Canon EOS M5

<p>Leaked before it is officially announced by Canon?</p>

<p>https://mpex.com/canon-eos-m5-mirrorless-digital-camera-body-only.html#product_tabs_tab_specs_dims</p>

<p>It's all over the internet by now :-) Looks a serious mirrorless offering by Canon, only the price is a bit hefty. </p>

<p>This. looks like EXACTLY what I want in a mirrorless camera!<br /><br />DANG!<br>

Price is high, but it looks SO promising.</p>

<p>Looks good but without a decent range of EF-M lenses it's a fairly pointless camera for serious users. Yes you can use the adapter to use standard EF lenses but then you may as well use a DSLR at half the price.</p>

<p>The lenses they have for the EF-M are apparently pretty good, but they need some fast primes (f2 would be fine) to make it interesting to enthusiasts. The only one they have, the 22mm f2, is excellent.</p>

<p>I had a quick look though the specs and it seems a fairly ordinary offering in today's mirrorless world. And the price has already been mentioned...<br>

There are several mature mirrorless lines out there, more importantly with mature lens line-ups (especially m4/3). So for new adopters this one is going to struggle - except maybe in that group which will buy anything with Canon's name on it.<br>

I'm all in favour of more choice, but I feel Canon has come to the party with too little, too late.</p>

<p>I think the price is what I expected. I think it will work. I'm also pretty certain that Canon will crank out some tasty lenses quite quickly.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Looks a serious mirrorless offering by Canon, only the price is a bit hefty.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That says it all, the EOS M5 "looks" like a modern MILC.</p>

<p>The resolution is a modest (by today's standards) 24 MP. The shooting speed is 7-9 fps, not barn-burning, but comparable to the Canon 5DmIV, a highly capable camera. In-body image stabilization is digital, and active only for video. This means it is active frame by frame, not during the exposure. For IS, you must rely on optical IS in the lens.</p>

<p>The sensor is APS-C sized, not full frame, and the native EF-M lenses are strictly consumer grade. You can use EF and EF-S lenses with an inexpensive adapter, with full control, which may be a redeeming feature, at the expense of compactness and lenses optimized for mirrorless use. The features are commensurate with the price, which is on the low side compared to the competition. The weight is in the Leica M range. The build appears to be robust, but Canon has not said what it's made of, other than it's not magnesium alloy. A plastic body might not be up to handling EF/EF-S lenses on a regular basis. The competition has moved beyond that point.</p>

<p>All said, it is a step in the right direction, but a baby step that doesn't compete with Canon's main line of DSLRs.</p>

<p>Edward, I'll be surprised if this isn't the direction for the entry level stuff from Canon and Nikon very shortly.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>with too little, too late.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This has been said before, but I doubt this is the case at all. The main rivals of this are Sony (who as we have noticed have largely lost interest in APS-C) and Fuji (who are great but not Canon). Their main competition is APS-C DSLRs from themselves and Nikon. m4/3 is a different kettle of fish altogether. They are currently taking aim at the people who would otherwise be buying APS-C DSLRs and they already have EF-M lenses pretty well to cover that. All they really need is to add some nice fast primes and some fixed aperture zooms, which I would imagine are in the works to attract nerds like us.</p>

<p>Mirrorless is hot! Why not?</p>

Seems to be a significant leap forward for the M system and at a price which is certainly competitive with

Canon mid-range DSLRs and alternative higher spec mirrorless models from Fuji, Oly, Panny, and Sony

(though Sony seems to have abandoned APSC in favor of the rich returns available from its FF products).

Camera is made out of metal and DP review describes it having perhaps the current best touch screen

interface. The main unique feature is of course the duel pixel AF system, and if it performs similarly to the 5D

iv live view (described by DP review as having the ability to stick to its subjects like glue during tracking) Canon

will certainly have a winner here. Native lenses are its Achilles heel, and perhaps the lack of 4K. But as

someone who still has a collection of EF lenses, though has generally abandoned Canon for m43, an M5 may

be a nice place to attach my beloved 70-200 F4L IS one day.

<p>Too little and late, hopefully not too late.</p>

<p>The Canon EOS M5 competes feature by feature with a Sony A7, the original version now three years old. Unlike the A7, there are no native lenses worthy of serious consideration. Like the Canon M5, the A7 can use Canon EF and EF-S lenses will full control, using an adapter. The Sony adapter is $299 because it has to translate the electronic codes for compatibility, whereas the M5 is natively compatible.</p>

<p>The M5 has none of the features incorporated into the mod 2 versions of the A7 cameras, like IBIS and exceptional high ISO capability. The video too is somewhat antiquated at 1080-60i maximum, compared to HD and 4K in the Sony at broadcast quality (50 MHz and 100 MHz respectively), or the 5DmIV Canon.</p>

<p>Canon and Nikon could produce something to compete with their flagship DSLRs, but are unlikely to do so until past the point of no return. There must be some "interesting" discussions in their boardrooms on this subject.</p>

<p>You can't really compare the Canon M5 to the Sony A7 because the A7 is a full frame camera, whereas the M5 is APS-C.</p>

<p>The camera looks promising and it's good to see Canon coming up with a camera worth considering. But I don't see enough of a difference between it and my much earlier tech Sony NEX 7, which is APS-C and has the same resolution, for me to want to switch. When Canon comes up with a FF version with lenses to fit, then I'll start getting interested.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>A full frame version would be a bigger camera of course.</p>

<p>Looks pretty decent with a feature set that meets most of my needs. I couldn't care less about an electronic finder in a mirrorless camera, so maybe I'll have to wait and see if they replace the M10 with the internals of this camera. <br>

They still need to work on the lens selection though. This camera is crying out for a couple of decent relatively fast primes. </p>

<p>Well, it's their best mirrorless so far which is better than nothing. I like the fully flipable screen. EF compatibility is, and fast lenses should be a key feature. Yet my EF lenses work quite well on my Sonys with the latest adapters. I don't really see this challenging the A6300. Or the A6000 for that matter at half the price. But I do like that screen. If they keep on the development track they may have a real contender in a few years</p>

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>A full frame version would be a bigger camera of course.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Is that how it works with Nikon, Canon or Sony? News to me. The M5 is only about 1/4" smaller than the A7, which is nearly identical to the size of a Leica M. The size of Nikons from the D1 to present has changed very little, and not at all between DX and FX.</p>

 

 

<p>My A7r body is actually slightly smaller than the Fuji X-T1 I had at the time.</p>

<p>the features on the new Canon M5 look good but I'll stick with my old cheap original M ...... (for now)<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless">www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless</a></p>

 

<p>Canon were too late with this; I'd been waiting for a few years for Canon to come out with a mirrorless with a viewfinder and to be compatible with other canon lenses. I jumped ship to Fuji XT-10 and XT-1 the latter outclasses all but the pro Canons. For travel the Fuji system is near ideal. </p>

 

<p><em>"Canon were too late with this; I'd been waiting for a few years for Canon to come out with a mirrorless with a viewfinder and to be compatible with other canon lenses."</em><br>

actually the camera has a viewfinder and is compatible with Canon lens </p>

<p>I have been using the Canon M range for some time now. I currently have a Canon M3 with an EVF with which I am very happy.<br>

As a professional I have a 5DS and a 5D MkIII for my work, but when I go on holiday I just want to lug all this equipment around. So as a travel camera it meets my needs. I take four lenses, 11-22, 22mm, 18-55 and 55-200mm and the whole lot goes neatly into a small messenger type bag, along with a light manfrotto monopod.<br>

I sometimes take a 50mm 1.4 prime with an adapter and/or a 200mm 2.8.<br>

I am waiting to get my hands on a M5 to see if it is worth the upgrade.<br>

The M3 has a metal body compared to the M5 which has a plastic body.<br>

The M3 EVF swivels to a vertical position<br>

The inbuilt flash is the same power.<br>

The main difference with the M5 apart from the inbuilt EVF, is the Digic 7 processing and dual pixel autofocus.<br>

I will say though, with the EVF eyepiece removed, makes the system with a pancake 22mm lens, quite compact and very good for street photography as onlookers think you just have an upmarket compact, whereas you have a wolf in sheep's clothing so to speak.<br>

The perception I have is that some people are damming the product without giving it a go. OK it is not a sports machine or a camera designed to take birds in flight but as a travel companion it is ideal in my humble opinion.<br>

Both the M3 and the M5 will fill this role admirably</p>

<div></div>

<p>Sorry I meant to say I DON'T want to lug all this equipment around!</p>