What the M is

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Robert Coe, Jul 24, 2012.

  1. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    A number of people, some of whom should know better, have been dissing the new
    Canon M for not having some or all of the features of a professional or
    semi-professional DSLR. I think we should be careful not to let their
    disappointment distract us from what has actually happened here. Which is that
    Canon, before any of its competitors, has begun a line of mirrorless cameras
    capable of evolving, with body enhancements only, into a putative replacement
    for some of its serious cameras (in their case, the 7D and ultimately, with a
    FF sensor, the 5D as well). The keys to that are the 18MP APS-C sensor and the
    provision for use of Canon's existing lens inventory.

    So if that evolution can happen, why didn't it? (After all, several
    manufacturers have already shown that mirrorless technology does work.)
    Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    through batteries too fast. It's no coincidence that the M is targeted for a
    market segment that can arguably do without an eye-level viewfinder. But that
    doesn't mean that Canon isn't actually aiming higher. Future processors will
    be more efficient; future batteries will be more powerful; and a larger camera
    can be a more effective heat sink. Meanwhile, the M serves as a prototype that
    should allow Canon to perfect its new autofocus system and other new features
    a high-end mirrorless camera will need.

    I can only hope that those future cameras start to appear before I'm too old
    and feeble to use one. ;^)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jul 24, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Coe

    Me Guest

    On 25/07/2012 10:53 a.m., Robert Coe wrote:

    > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    > through batteries too fast. It's no coincidence that the M is targeted for a
    > market segment that can arguably do without an eye-level viewfinder.


    No. You should take a trip to a local camera store, and try a Sony slt
    a77. The EVF is fantastic, and IIRC, battery life allows up to 1,000
    shots per charge. (of course the EVF is still going to chew through much
    more battery than a dslr)
    Secondly, the EOS-M has a rear LCD, which probably uses /more/ battery
    power than an EVF.
    >
     
    Me, Jul 25, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:20:32 +1200, Me <> wrote:
    : On 25/07/2012 10:53 a.m., Robert Coe wrote:
    :
    : > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    : > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    : > through batteries too fast. It's no coincidence that the M is targeted for a
    : > market segment that can arguably do without an eye-level viewfinder.
    :
    : No. You should take a trip to a local camera store, and try a Sony slt
    : a77. The EVF is fantastic, and IIRC, battery life allows up to 1,000
    : shots per charge. (of course the EVF is still going to chew through much
    : more battery than a dslr)

    The a77 has a 12fps EVF, which is too slow for a serious camera.

    : Secondly, the EOS-M has a rear LCD, which probably uses /more/ battery
    : power than an EVF.

    Irrelevant. You have to have that anyway.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jul 25, 2012
    #3
  4. Robert Coe

    Me Guest

    On 25/07/2012 11:32 a.m., Robert Coe wrote:
    > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:20:32 +1200, Me <> wrote:
    > : On 25/07/2012 10:53 a.m., Robert Coe wrote:
    > :
    > : > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    > : > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    > : > through batteries too fast. It's no coincidence that the M is targeted for a
    > : > market segment that can arguably do without an eye-level viewfinder.
    > :
    > : No. You should take a trip to a local camera store, and try a Sony slt
    > : a77. The EVF is fantastic, and IIRC, battery life allows up to 1,000
    > : shots per charge. (of course the EVF is still going to chew through much
    > : more battery than a dslr)
    >
    > The a77 has a 12fps EVF, which is too slow for a serious camera.


    IIRC, the VF is actually 60fps refresh.
    I would never own a Sony camera, so if you're assuming that I'm shilling
    for Sony, I'm definitely not. But as I said, you should visit a camera
    store and look at the SLT a77 EVF (or SLT a65 - I think that has the
    same EVF as the a77). It destroyed many of my reservations about EVFs
    being ready to take over from OVFs. There is still some noticeable
    latency/lag with the a77, and by all accounts, the Sony AF system isn't
    a patch on Canon/Nikon dslr wrt focus tracking, at least on models above
    entry-point.
    The 12fps you refer to is the maximum burst rate.
    You are perhaps confused by the fact that during burst shooting, the
    60fps feed to the EVF cannot be maintained, and IIRC the EVF displays a
    sequence of still images - which may be a bit disconcerting, but
    /almost/ the same applies to DSLRs at high burst rate, with OVF blackout
    between frames, and where you'll be paying a big premium for models
    (Nikon D3/4, Canon 1d etc) with reduced blackout time.
    >
    > : Secondly, the EOS-M has a rear LCD, which probably uses /more/ battery
    > : power than an EVF.
    >
    > Irrelevant. You have to have that anyway.
    >

    What?
    This was my point, if you have to have it, then better that it uses less
    power (like an EVF) than a large rear LCD!
     
    Me, Jul 25, 2012
    #4
  5. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:43:32 +1200, Me <> wrote:
    : On 25/07/2012 11:32 a.m., Robert Coe wrote:
    : > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:20:32 +1200, Me <> wrote:
    : > : On 25/07/2012 10:53 a.m., Robert Coe wrote:
    : > :
    : > : > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    : > : > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    : > : > through batteries too fast. It's no coincidence that the M is targeted for a
    : > : > market segment that can arguably do without an eye-level viewfinder.
    : > :
    : > : No. You should take a trip to a local camera store, and try a Sony slt
    : > : a77. The EVF is fantastic, and IIRC, battery life allows up to 1,000
    : > : shots per charge. (of course the EVF is still going to chew through much
    : > : more battery than a dslr)
    : >
    : > The a77 has a 12fps EVF, which is too slow for a serious camera.
    :
    : IIRC, the VF is actually 60fps refresh.
    : I would never own a Sony camera, so if you're assuming that I'm shilling
    : for Sony, I'm definitely not. But as I said, you should visit a camera
    : store and look at the SLT a77 EVF (or SLT a65 - I think that has the
    : same EVF as the a77). It destroyed many of my reservations about EVFs
    : being ready to take over from OVFs. There is still some noticeable
    : latency/lag with the a77, and by all accounts, the Sony AF system isn't
    : a patch on Canon/Nikon dslr wrt focus tracking, at least on models above
    : entry-point.
    : The 12fps you refer to is the maximum burst rate.

    Maybe so. There is a comma after "12fps" that I didn't see before.

    : You are perhaps confused by the fact that during burst shooting, the
    : 60fps feed to the EVF cannot be maintained, and IIRC the EVF displays a
    : sequence of still images - which may be a bit disconcerting, but
    : /almost/ the same applies to DSLRs at high burst rate, with OVF blackout
    : between frames, and where you'll be paying a big premium for models
    : (Nikon D3/4, Canon 1d etc) with reduced blackout time.
    : >
    : > : Secondly, the EOS-M has a rear LCD, which probably uses /more/ battery
    : > : power than an EVF.
    : >
    : > Irrelevant. You have to have that anyway.
    : >
    : What?
    : This was my point, if you have to have it, then better that it uses less
    : power (like an EVF) than a large rear LCD!

    When's the last time you saw a digital camera without a rear LCD, regardless
    of what other kind of viewfinder it did or didn't have?

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jul 25, 2012
    #5
  6. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:43:32 +1200, Me <> wrote:
    > : This was my point, if you have to have it, then better that it uses less
    > : power (like an EVF) than a large rear LCD!
    >
    > When's the last time you saw a digital camera without a rear LCD,
    > regardless
    > of what other kind of viewfinder it did or didn't have?


    No need to run a rear LCD permanently if you have an OVF/EVF though, you
    only need turn it on *if* you want to review. I cant see any reason why a
    EVF camera should use more power than a rear LCD only camera when used
    properly. Both will use more power than a OVF camera though.

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Jul 25, 2012
    #6
  7. Robert Coe <> wrote:
    > A number of people, some of whom should know better, have been dissing the new
    > Canon M for not having some or all of the features of a professional or
    > semi-professional DSLR. I think we should be careful not to let their
    > disappointment distract us from what has actually happened here. Which is that
    > Canon, before any of its competitors, has begun a line of mirrorless cameras
    > capable of evolving, with body enhancements only, into a putative replacement
    > for some of its serious cameras (in their case, the 7D and ultimately, with a
    > FF sensor, the 5D as well).


    Even assuming that Canon could magically transfer all the good
    points of a SLR design into a camera (including an electronic
    viewfinder), it'll never replace the 5D series: EF-M --- the
    mount --- can't do a FF sensor. It's a dedicated 1.6x crop mount.

    > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    > through batteries too fast.


    Really?

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jul 25, 2012
    #7
  8. Robert Coe

    Me Guest

    On 26/07/2012 1:58 a.m., Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2012-07-24 21:43 , Trevor wrote:
    >> "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:43:32 +1200, Me <> wrote:
    >>> : This was my point, if you have to have it, then better that it uses
    >>> less
    >>> : power (like an EVF) than a large rear LCD!
    >>>
    >>> When's the last time you saw a digital camera without a rear LCD,
    >>> regardless
    >>> of what other kind of viewfinder it did or didn't have?

    >>
    >> No need to run a rear LCD permanently if you have an OVF/EVF though, you
    >> only need turn it on *if* you want to review. I cant see any reason why a

    >
    > Do any of the EVF's allow review using the EVF's? I can go long periods
    > with my eye in the VF while operating controls. Quick reviews there
    > would be handy.
    >
    >

    Yes - usually.
    Handy also if you wear corrective glasses, but use the diopter
    adjustment on the VF to shoot with glasses off, but would need to put
    them back on to see the rear LCD clearly.

    I expect that the EF-m would be a dog for this though, as you need to
    use the LCD touch screen to access common camera settings.
     
    Me, Jul 25, 2012
    #8
  9. Robert Coe

    Me Guest

    On 26/07/2012 10:51 a.m., Me wrote:
    > On 26/07/2012 1:58 a.m., Alan Browne wrote:
    >> On 2012-07-24 21:43 , Trevor wrote:
    >>> "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:43:32 +1200, Me <> wrote:
    >>>> : This was my point, if you have to have it, then better that it uses
    >>>> less
    >>>> : power (like an EVF) than a large rear LCD!
    >>>>
    >>>> When's the last time you saw a digital camera without a rear LCD,
    >>>> regardless
    >>>> of what other kind of viewfinder it did or didn't have?
    >>>
    >>> No need to run a rear LCD permanently if you have an OVF/EVF though, you
    >>> only need turn it on *if* you want to review. I cant see any reason
    >>> why a

    >>
    >> Do any of the EVF's allow review using the EVF's? I can go long periods
    >> with my eye in the VF while operating controls. Quick reviews there
    >> would be handy.
    >>
    >>

    > Yes - usually.
    > Handy also if you wear corrective glasses, but use the diopter
    > adjustment on the VF to shoot with glasses off, but would need to put
    > them back on to see the rear LCD clearly.
    >
    > I expect that the EF-m would be a dog for this though, as you need to
    > use the LCD touch screen to access common camera settings.

    Sorry - that's obviously incomplete. "if the EF-m had an EVF"
    Same would apply for any MILC with EVF and touchscreen rear LCD - unless
    commonly used controls still had buttons. Unfortunately that can lead
    to something like the Oly OM5, which (IMO) is far to small for the
    assortment of buttons and dials on the body, at least with hands my size
    (average).
     
    Me, Jul 25, 2012
    #9
  10. In rec.photo.digital Alan Browne <> wrote:
    > On 2012-07-24 21:43 , Trevor wrote:
    >> "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:43:32 +1200, Me <> wrote:
    >>> : This was my point, if you have to have it, then better that it uses less
    >>> : power (like an EVF) than a large rear LCD!
    >>>
    >>> When's the last time you saw a digital camera without a rear LCD,
    >>> regardless
    >>> of what other kind of viewfinder it did or didn't have?

    >>
    >> No need to run a rear LCD permanently if you have an OVF/EVF though, you
    >> only need turn it on *if* you want to review. I cant see any reason why a


    > Do any of the EVF's allow review using the EVF's? I can go long periods
    > with my eye in the VF while operating controls. Quick reviews there
    > would be handy.


    Over the years Sony's EVFs have offered increasing amounts of preview
    and extra information in a variety of customisable modes and choice
    selections. The A77 and NEX7 are probably the most sophisticated so
    far.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jul 26, 2012
    #10
  11. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:56:44 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    <> wrote:
    : Robert Coe <> wrote:
    : > A number of people, some of whom should know better, have been dissing the new
    : > Canon M for not having some or all of the features of a professional or
    : > semi-professional DSLR. I think we should be careful not to let their
    : > disappointment distract us from what has actually happened here. Which is that
    : > Canon, before any of its competitors, has begun a line of mirrorless cameras
    : > capable of evolving, with body enhancements only, into a putative replacement
    : > for some of its serious cameras (in their case, the 7D and ultimately, with a
    : > FF sensor, the 5D as well).
    :
    : Even assuming that Canon could magically transfer all the good
    : points of a SLR design into a camera (including an electronic
    : viewfinder), it'll never replace the 5D series: EF-M --- the
    : mount --- can't do a FF sensor. It's a dedicated 1.6x crop mount.
    :
    : > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    : > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    : > through batteries too fast.
    :
    : Really?

    Really. The Canon Web site predicts that the M will average 230 pictures on a
    battery charge. With no built-in flash to help slurp up watts. Sad.



    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jul 27, 2012
    #11
  12. Robert Coe

    Wally Guest

    On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:52:01 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:56:44 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    ><> wrote:
    >: Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >: > A number of people, some of whom should know better, have been dissing the new
    >: > Canon M for not having some or all of the features of a professional or
    >: > semi-professional DSLR. I think we should be careful not to let their
    >: > disappointment distract us from what has actually happened here. Which is that
    >: > Canon, before any of its competitors, has begun a line of mirrorless cameras
    >: > capable of evolving, with body enhancements only, into a putative replacement
    >: > for some of its serious cameras (in their case, the 7D and ultimately, with a
    >: > FF sensor, the 5D as well).
    >:
    >: Even assuming that Canon could magically transfer all the good
    >: points of a SLR design into a camera (including an electronic
    >: viewfinder), it'll never replace the 5D series: EF-M --- the
    >: mount --- can't do a FF sensor. It's a dedicated 1.6x crop mount.
    >:
    >: > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    >: > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    >: > through batteries too fast.
    >:
    >: Really?
    >
    >Really. The Canon Web site predicts that the M will average 230 pictures on a
    >battery charge. With no built-in flash to help slurp up watts. Sad.


    That's not a problem for me. 230 pics is a lot of pics. If you need
    more, get an extra battery.

    W
     
    Wally, Jul 27, 2012
    #12
  13. Robert Coe

    Trevor Guest

    "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:56:44 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    > <> wrote:
    > : Robert Coe <> wrote:
    > : > A number of people, some of whom should know better, have been dissing
    > the new
    > : > Canon M for not having some or all of the features of a professional
    > or
    > : > semi-professional DSLR. I think we should be careful not to let their
    > : > disappointment distract us from what has actually happened here. Which
    > is that
    > : > Canon, before any of its competitors, has begun a line of mirrorless
    > cameras
    > : > capable of evolving, with body enhancements only, into a putative
    > replacement
    > : > for some of its serious cameras (in their case, the 7D and ultimately,
    > with a
    > : > FF sensor, the 5D as well).
    > :
    > : Even assuming that Canon could magically transfer all the good
    > : points of a SLR design into a camera (including an electronic
    > : viewfinder), it'll never replace the 5D series: EF-M --- the
    > : mount --- can't do a FF sensor. It's a dedicated 1.6x crop mount.
    > :
    > : > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary
    > high-resolution
    > : > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot
    > and go
    > : > through batteries too fast.
    > :
    > : Really?
    >
    > Really. The Canon Web site predicts that the M will average 230 pictures
    > on a
    > battery charge. With no built-in flash to help slurp up watts. Sad.



    That's because it's driving a large hi res rear LCD. Why would a small EVF
    use more power?
    (and you don't need both at once)

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Jul 27, 2012
    #13
  14. Robert Coe

    David Taylor Guest

    On 27/07/2012 06:32, Wally wrote:
    []
    > That's not a problem for me. 230 pics is a lot of pics. If you need
    > more, get an extra battery.
    >
    > W


    I could easily get through more than 230 shots on a busy day - it would
    be a major limitation for me. But perhaps not for the market segment
    this camera is aimed at?
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
     
    David Taylor, Jul 27, 2012
    #14
  15. Robert Coe

    Wally Guest

    On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 09:34:09 -0400, Alan Browne
    <> wrote:

    >On 2012-07-27 01:32 , Wally wrote:
    >> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:52:01 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >
    >>> Really. The Canon Web site predicts that the M will average 230 pictures on a
    >>> battery charge. With no built-in flash to help slurp up watts. Sad.

    >>
    >> That's not a problem for me. 230 pics is a lot of pics. If you need
    >> more, get an extra battery.

    >
    >230 is not much when you consider that you may not get to re-charge the
    >battery often. I have 2 batts for my camera but it's rare that I run
    >one down during a single days shooting. That doesn't mean I'll be in
    >position to recharge it before the next day, however.


    I did some cursory checks of my shooting and found on some occasions I
    do around 300+ shots per day - not often, but often enough. (I'm an
    amateur.)

    But I wouldn't do such shooting on the M. The M would be taken along
    on days such as where I don't expect to shoot, or in situations where
    a DSLR is a bit out of place.

    I had such a situation yesterday on a hike (with a hiking club). Took
    my wife's PowerShot SD980 and took 15 shots.

    BTW, my wife has had the SD980 for 2 years now, and has taken 790
    shots TOTAL in that time.

    W
     
    Wally, Jul 27, 2012
    #15
  16. Robert Coe

    Joe Kotroczo Guest

    On 25/07/2012 02:39, Savageduck wrote:

    (...)
    > Check that wonderful piece of digital imaging technology, the GoPro,
    > which comes with no view finder option, ...er make that no VF of any
    > type.
    > < http://gopro.com/ >


    There's an LCD back as an optional accessory:
    <http://gopro.com/hd-hero-accessories/lcd-bacpac/>

    Or you can get the WiFi back and remotely view on a smartphone or tablet.


    --
    Illegitimi non carborundum
     
    Joe Kotroczo, Jul 27, 2012
    #16
  17. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:32:12 -0600, Wally <> wrote:
    : On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:52:01 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    :
    : >On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:56:44 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    : ><> wrote:
    : >: Robert Coe <> wrote:
    : >: > A number of people, some of whom should know better, have been dissing the new
    : >: > Canon M for not having some or all of the features of a professional or
    : >: > semi-professional DSLR. I think we should be careful not to let their
    : >: > disappointment distract us from what has actually happened here. Which is that
    : >: > Canon, before any of its competitors, has begun a line of mirrorless cameras
    : >: > capable of evolving, with body enhancements only, into a putative replacement
    : >: > for some of its serious cameras (in their case, the 7D and ultimately, with a
    : >: > FF sensor, the 5D as well).
    : >:
    : >: Even assuming that Canon could magically transfer all the good
    : >: points of a SLR design into a camera (including an electronic
    : >: viewfinder), it'll never replace the 5D series: EF-M --- the
    : >: mount --- can't do a FF sensor. It's a dedicated 1.6x crop mount.
    : >:
    : >: > Because today a processor fast enough to drive the necessary high-resolution
    : >: > EVF would be too inefficient for the job; i.e., it would run too hot and go
    : >: > through batteries too fast.
    : >:
    : >: Really?
    : >
    : >Really. The Canon Web site predicts that the M will average 230 pictures on a
    : >battery charge. With no built-in flash to help slurp up watts. Sad.
    :
    : That's not a problem for me. 230 pics is a lot of pics. If you need
    : more, get an extra battery.

    I have five batteries for my two 7D's, but I don't much like changing them
    during a shoot. 230 pix per shoot is no more than average for me, whether I'm
    using one camera or two.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jul 27, 2012
    #17
  18. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 08:32:59 -0600, Wally <> wrote:
    : On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 09:34:09 -0400, Alan Browne
    : <> wrote:
    :
    : >On 2012-07-27 01:32 , Wally wrote:
    : >> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:52:01 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    : >
    : >>> Really. The Canon Web site predicts that the M will average 230 pictures on a
    : >>> battery charge. With no built-in flash to help slurp up watts. Sad.
    : >>
    : >> That's not a problem for me. 230 pics is a lot of pics. If you need
    : >> more, get an extra battery.
    : >
    : >230 is not much when you consider that you may not get to re-charge the
    : >battery often. I have 2 batts for my camera but it's rare that I run
    : >one down during a single days shooting. That doesn't mean I'll be in
    : >position to recharge it before the next day, however.
    :
    : I did some cursory checks of my shooting and found on some occasions I
    : do around 300+ shots per day - not often, but often enough. (I'm an
    : amateur.)
    :
    : But I wouldn't do such shooting on the M. The M would be taken along
    : on days such as where I don't expect to shoot, or in situations where
    : a DSLR is a bit out of place.

    Yeah, but remember that what started this thread was my speculation that the
    true objective of the M product line is to eventually introduce much more
    serious cameras, an objective that is likely to be thwarted in the short term
    by the high power demands of a mirrorless camera and batteries not yet ready
    to cope adequately with those demands.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jul 27, 2012
    #18
  19. On 7/27/2012 2:24 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
    >
    > Yeah, but remember that what started this thread was my speculation that the
    > true objective of the M product line is to eventually introduce much more
    > serious cameras, an objective that is likely to be thwarted in the short term
    > by the high power demands of a mirrorless camera and batteries not yet ready
    > to cope adequately with those demands.
    >
    >


    I've got a Canon 7D, and took 1600 picture during my
    vacation in Borneo.

    I really really like the 7D. Its auto focus is much better than my
    old 30D. At least for flat subjects, that is, or
    at least large objects more than filling the active sensor ...
    like say a human head filling the center 1/4 of the frame.

    But ... I took lots of pictures of wildlife amongst trees.
    Mostly birds, monkeys, and orangutangs.

    Even at 300mm autofocus often cannot cope. There's
    too much near ... or even actually in front of ...
    the desired object for autofocus to work correctly.

    But of course live view and manual focus works. And it
    works much better than the optical viewfinder since you can
    get 10x magnification view on the back LCD screen.

    AND THIS EATS THE BATTERY UP JUST LIKE a mirrorless camera.

    As I quickly found out. I'm glad I had three batteries.

    Doug McDonald
     
    Doug McDonald, Jul 27, 2012
    #19
  20. Robert Coe

    Wally Guest

    On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:24:59 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 08:32:59 -0600, Wally <> wrote:
    >: On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 09:34:09 -0400, Alan Browne
    >: <> wrote:
    >:
    >: >On 2012-07-27 01:32 , Wally wrote:
    >: >> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:52:01 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >: >
    >: >>> Really. The Canon Web site predicts that the M will average 230 pictures on a
    >: >>> battery charge. With no built-in flash to help slurp up watts. Sad.
    >: >>
    >: >> That's not a problem for me. 230 pics is a lot of pics. If you need
    >: >> more, get an extra battery.
    >: >
    >: >230 is not much when you consider that you may not get to re-charge the
    >: >battery often. I have 2 batts for my camera but it's rare that I run
    >: >one down during a single days shooting. That doesn't mean I'll be in
    >: >position to recharge it before the next day, however.
    >:
    >: I did some cursory checks of my shooting and found on some occasions I
    >: do around 300+ shots per day - not often, but often enough. (I'm an
    >: amateur.)
    >:
    >: But I wouldn't do such shooting on the M. The M would be taken along
    >: on days such as where I don't expect to shoot, or in situations where
    >: a DSLR is a bit out of place.
    >
    >Yeah, but remember that what started this thread was my speculation that the
    >true objective of the M product line is to eventually introduce much more
    >serious cameras, an objective that is likely to be thwarted in the short term
    >by the high power demands of a mirrorless camera and batteries not yet ready
    >to cope adequately with those demands.


    Yes, the M mount seems to have the potential to grow into a serious
    APS-C line with sophisticated bodies and smaller lenses.

    Unfortunately the new EF-M 18-55mm zoom is actually slightly heavier
    than the EF-S version, and that is for now an indication that we might
    be too optimistic.

    W
     
    Wally, Jul 28, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page