What the M is

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

  1. Robert Coe <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:01:45 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    >: Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:56:44 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    >: >: 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.


    >: >: 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.


    >: And that has exactly what to do with a processor driving an EVF,
    >: when the CIPA battery life is low because the back display eats
    >: the battery (please do look up the CIPA routine for measuring
    >: battery life)?


    > Pretty much everything, I'd say.


    How so?

    > Power is fungible, except in an add-on flash.


    And that proves in which way that a processor for an EVF
    would be too inefficient?

    > Whatever power the dual processors use to drive the EVF, the back display
    > doesn't get. Etc.


    You don't need the EVF if you're driving the back display and
    vice versa.


    >: That's as logical as "the swimmers didn't get an olympic medal
    >: because the fencers were fighting".


    > No, it's like "The swimmers couldn't race because there was only enough power
    > to light the fencing venue."


    I see. So you have "proof" that lighting the glass-roofed swimming
    arena needs as much power as the opaque-roofed fencing venue.

    a) You don't need the EVF if you're driving the back display and
    vice versa.

    b) Power shortages? Sure. That'll be it. Especially with all
    the EVF-cameras out there.


    >: If you need more battery life, buy an extra battery. Or use
    >: a DSLR.


    > Well, you can't say I don't take your advice. I have three DSLR's (four if you
    > count my old 400D) and lots of batteries (five for my two 7D's and several
    > more for the other two cameras).


    So what *is* your problem?

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 4, 2012
    #41
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 20:04:41 +0200, Alfred Molon <>
    wrote:
    : In article <>, Robert Coe
    : says...
    : > It had better have room for at least twice as many batteries as the M. 230
    : > shots per charge is *not* adequate for serious photography.
    :
    : And the new Canon is not meant for "serious" photography either. Can you
    : imagine a pro leaving his DSLR at home and using the "M" for a shoot?

    Of course not. What I'm saying is that a hypothetical M-2 or M-3, replete with
    proper controls and a high-speed, high-resolution EVF, could be used for
    serious work, since it would have a big enough sensor. But such a camera could
    probably not be built today (at least not for a price we'd be willing to pay),
    because of limitations inherent in today's processors and batteries. But my
    take is that Canon must think they can do it within a couple of years, else
    they would have followed Nikon's lead or bailed on the concept.

    The M is too expensive for its mission if that mission is to serve the needs
    of any but the most affluent snapshooters. The only way it makes sense is as a
    stalking horse for a line of higher-performance cameras targeted at today's
    DSLR users.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Aug 5, 2012
    #42
    1. Advertising

  3. Robert Coe <> wrote:

    > Speaking of Canon, where the hell is that firmware upgrade to the 7D that was
    > touted, for August availability, with such fanfare back in June?


    It's already September? Whee, does time fly ...

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 6, 2012
    #43
  4. Robert Coe

    David Taylor Guest

    On 06/08/2012 12:12, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    []
    > Yep, like a 5D. Or a 1D.
    >
    > Unlike those you'll get a flash bundled with the EOS M in many markets.
    > And you can upgrade the flash unit without replacing the camera.
    >
    > -Wolfgang


    Having a cumbersome add-on flash unit somewhat defeats making the camera
    compact!
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Aug 6, 2012
    #44
  5. Robert Coe

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <jvojdb$605$>, david-
    d says...
    >
    > On 06/08/2012 12:12, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    > []
    > > Yep, like a 5D. Or a 1D.
    > >
    > > Unlike those you'll get a flash bundled with the EOS M in many markets.
    > > And you can upgrade the flash unit without replacing the camera.
    > >
    > > -Wolfgang

    >
    > Having a cumbersome add-on flash unit somewhat defeats making the camera
    > compact!


    If this thing was cheap and provided good functionality I could see it
    having a nice niche as a tethered studio camera where you're using a
    full sized monitor for viewfinder. But with it costing as much as an
    SLR I don't see much purpose to it except as a supplemental camera for
    specialized operations and for that a thin point-and-shoot would be a
    better bet.

    Cutting features and charging a premium price for the result may work in
    the wierd world of marketing, I can't figure it though, anymore than I
    can figure out why publishers would want to charge more for ebooks than
    for paper ones.
    J. Clarke, Aug 6, 2012
    #45
  6. David Taylor <> wrote:
    > On 06/08/2012 12:12, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    > []
    >> Yep, like a 5D. Or a 1D.


    >> Unlike those you'll get a flash bundled with the EOS M in many markets.
    >> And you can upgrade the flash unit without replacing the camera.


    > Having a cumbersome add-on flash unit somewhat defeats making the camera
    > compact!


    Having the cumbersome build-in flash (same power, same flash
    window size) enlarging the camera body by that amount doesn't
    make the camera less compact?

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 7, 2012
    #46
  7. J. Clarke <> wrote:
    > In article <jvojdb$605$>, david-
    > d says...


    >> On 06/08/2012 12:12, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> []
    >> > Yep, like a 5D. Or a 1D.


    >> > Unlike those you'll get a flash bundled with the EOS M in many markets.
    >> > And you can upgrade the flash unit without replacing the camera.


    >> Having a cumbersome add-on flash unit somewhat defeats making the camera
    >> compact!


    > If this thing was cheap and provided good functionality I could see it
    > having a nice niche as a tethered studio camera where you're using a
    > full sized monitor for viewfinder. But with it costing as much as an
    > SLR I don't see much purpose to it except as a supplemental camera for
    > specialized operations and for that a thin point-and-shoot would be a
    > better bet.


    Prices will fall, as they always do with bodies. That way
    Canon makes more money: now from the rich all they can get,
    later from the poorer all they can afford.

    > Cutting features and charging a premium price for the result may work in
    > the wierd world of marketing, I can't figure it though, anymore than I
    > can figure out why publishers would want to charge more for ebooks than
    > for paper ones.


    Hey, I haven't yet understood what's so special about a mirrorless
    camera. But it seems people are really buying them. Beats me.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 7, 2012
    #47
  8. Robert Coe

    David Taylor Guest

    On 07/08/2012 22:43, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    > David Taylor <> wrote:
    >> On 06/08/2012 12:12, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> []
    >>> Yep, like a 5D. Or a 1D.

    >
    >>> Unlike those you'll get a flash bundled with the EOS M in many markets.
    >>> And you can upgrade the flash unit without replacing the camera.

    >
    >> Having a cumbersome add-on flash unit somewhat defeats making the camera
    >> compact!

    >
    > Having the cumbersome build-in flash (same power, same flash
    > window size) enlarging the camera body by that amount doesn't
    > make the camera less compact?
    >
    > -Wolfgang


    Possibly, but the pop-up flash in DSLRs is a lot smaller than some
    add-on unit, and very useful even if it doesn't have the same power. If
    Canon is aiming at those stepping up from P&S, not having a built-in
    flash will be a reason /not/ to purchase.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Aug 9, 2012
    #48
  9. David Taylor <> wrote:
    > On 07/08/2012 22:43, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> David Taylor <> wrote:
    >>> On 06/08/2012 12:12, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >>> []
    >>>> Yep, like a 5D. Or a 1D.


    >>>> Unlike those you'll get a flash bundled with the EOS M in many markets.
    >>>> And you can upgrade the flash unit without replacing the camera.


    >>> Having a cumbersome add-on flash unit somewhat defeats making the camera
    >>> compact!


    >> Having the cumbersome build-in flash (same power, same flash
    >> window size) enlarging the camera body by that amount doesn't
    >> make the camera less compact?


    > Possibly, but the pop-up flash in DSLRs is a lot smaller than some
    > add-on unit, and very useful even if it doesn't have the same power.


    The pop-up flash in DSLRs does take up space, never the less.

    In a compact body like the M there's no convenient prisma housing
    where you can easily put the flash. Considering the lens
    sizes you can put on the M you'd need a really high flash to
    avoid shading --- and there's just no room for that in the M.

    > If
    > Canon is aiming at those stepping up from P&S, not having a built-in
    > flash will be a reason /not/ to purchase.


    Why?
    The P&S *needs* flash for all but full daylight outside, the M
    can and will do indoors without flash.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 10, 2012
    #49
  10. Robert Coe

    David Taylor Guest

    On 10/08/2012 21:57, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    > David Taylor <> wrote:
    >> On 07/08/2012 22:43, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >>> David Taylor <> wrote:
    >>>> On 06/08/2012 12:12, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >>>> []
    >>>>> Yep, like a 5D. Or a 1D.

    >
    >>>>> Unlike those you'll get a flash bundled with the EOS M in many markets.
    >>>>> And you can upgrade the flash unit without replacing the camera.

    >
    >>>> Having a cumbersome add-on flash unit somewhat defeats making the camera
    >>>> compact!

    >
    >>> Having the cumbersome build-in flash (same power, same flash
    >>> window size) enlarging the camera body by that amount doesn't
    >>> make the camera less compact?

    >
    >> Possibly, but the pop-up flash in DSLRs is a lot smaller than some
    >> add-on unit, and very useful even if it doesn't have the same power.

    >
    > The pop-up flash in DSLRs does take up space, never the less.
    >
    > In a compact body like the M there's no convenient prisma housing
    > where you can easily put the flash. Considering the lens
    > sizes you can put on the M you'd need a really high flash to
    > avoid shading --- and there's just no room for that in the M.
    >
    >> If
    >> Canon is aiming at those stepping up from P&S, not having a built-in
    >> flash will be a reason /not/ to purchase.

    >
    > Why?
    > The P&S *needs* flash for all but full daylight outside, the M
    > can and will do indoors without flash.
    >
    > -Wolfgang


    While I can see the space argument, you are wrong about a P&S needing
    flash in all but full daylight. Even a fill-in flash would help the
    aspiring P&S photographer moving to the "M", so I think the lack of
    built-in flash is a disincentive.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Aug 12, 2012
    #50
  11. Robert Coe

    Bruce Guest

    David Taylor <> wrote:
    >On 10/08/2012 21:57, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> Why?
    >> The P&S *needs* flash for all but full daylight outside, the M
    >> can and will do indoors without flash.
    >>
    >> -Wolfgang

    >
    >While I can see the space argument, you are wrong about a P&S needing
    >flash in all but full daylight. Even a fill-in flash would help the
    >aspiring P&S photographer moving to the "M", so I think the lack of
    >built-in flash is a disincentive.



    I think you should ask the people who the EOS M is aimed at.

    I'll say it again, for the benefit of people who may not have read it
    before, that the EOS M is almost certainly not aimed at anyone reading
    Usenet photo newsgroups or enthusiast forums. Canon has stated that
    it is aimed at people trading up from compact P&S or superzoom cameras
    who want EOS image quality in a small camera.

    Canon sees this market as being composed more of women than men.

    In some (most?) world markets, the EOS M will be bundled with a small
    flash unit which easily fits in a pocket or handbag and can quickly be
    clipped on when needed.
    Bruce, Aug 14, 2012
    #51
  12. Robert Coe

    David Taylor Guest

    On 14/08/2012 22:47, Bruce wrote:
    []
    > I think you should ask the people who the EOS M is aimed at.
    >
    > I'll say it again, for the benefit of people who may not have read it
    > before, that the EOS M is almost certainly not aimed at anyone reading
    > Usenet photo newsgroups or enthusiast forums. Canon has stated that
    > it is aimed at people trading up from compact P&S or superzoom cameras
    > who want EOS image quality in a small camera.
    >
    > Canon sees this market as being composed more of women than men.
    >
    > In some (most?) world markets, the EOS M will be bundled with a small
    > flash unit which easily fits in a pocket or handbag and can quickly be
    > clipped on when needed.


    My sample of one (!) female suggests that the flash unit would simply be
    left at home.

    "Quickly clipped on when needed" sounds like another opportunity for
    missing shots, like having to change lenses....

    Different folks, different needs.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Aug 15, 2012
    #52
  13. Robert Coe

    Bruce Guest

    David Taylor <> wrote:

    >On 14/08/2012 22:47, Bruce wrote:
    >[]
    >> I think you should ask the people who the EOS M is aimed at.
    >>
    >> I'll say it again, for the benefit of people who may not have read it
    >> before, that the EOS M is almost certainly not aimed at anyone reading
    >> Usenet photo newsgroups or enthusiast forums. Canon has stated that
    >> it is aimed at people trading up from compact P&S or superzoom cameras
    >> who want EOS image quality in a small camera.
    >>
    >> Canon sees this market as being composed more of women than men.
    >>
    >> In some (most?) world markets, the EOS M will be bundled with a small
    >> flash unit which easily fits in a pocket or handbag and can quickly be
    >> clipped on when needed.

    >
    >My sample of one (!) female suggests that the flash unit would simply be
    >left at home.
    >
    >"Quickly clipped on when needed" sounds like another opportunity for
    >missing shots, like having to change lenses....
    >
    >Different folks, different needs.



    True. I was parroting Canon's spiel to dealers. That doesn't mean I
    agree with it. I think a built in flash would have been a better
    idea, but still retaining the hotshoe so that larger Speedlites could
    be used.
    Bruce, Aug 15, 2012
    #53
  14. Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <>, Wolfgang
    > Weisselberg says...
    >> Why?


    > Fill flash


    M is bundled with an external flash (not in all markets).
    Solved.

    Or does fill flash only work with P&S cameras where the flash
    is inbuilt?

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 16, 2012
    #54
  15. David Taylor <> wrote:
    > On 10/08/2012 21:57, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> David Taylor <> wrote:


    >>> If
    >>> Canon is aiming at those stepping up from P&S, not having a built-in
    >>> flash will be a reason /not/ to purchase.


    >> Why?
    >> The P&S *needs* flash for all but full daylight outside, the M
    >> can and will do indoors without flash.


    > While I can see the space argument, you are wrong about a P&S needing
    > flash in all but full daylight.


    Tripod (in mild cases stabilizer) and long exposure works, sure.
    Or ISO 800+ (and that on a P&S sensor).

    > Even a fill-in flash would help the
    > aspiring P&S photographer moving to the "M",


    .... thus a flash unit is bundled (not in all markets) ...

    > so I think the lack of
    > built-in flash is a disincentive.


    .... for you.

    Which typical P&S user uses flash in a creative, directed way?
    And which P&S supports that well?

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 16, 2012
    #55
  16. Robert Coe

    David Taylor Guest

    On 16/08/2012 17:14, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    > David Taylor <> wrote:
    >> On 10/08/2012 21:57, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >>> David Taylor <> wrote:

    >
    >>>> If
    >>>> Canon is aiming at those stepping up from P&S, not having a built-in
    >>>> flash will be a reason /not/ to purchase.

    >
    >>> Why?
    >>> The P&S *needs* flash for all but full daylight outside, the M
    >>> can and will do indoors without flash.

    >
    >> While I can see the space argument, you are wrong about a P&S needing
    >> flash in all but full daylight.

    >
    > Tripod (in mild cases stabilizer) and long exposure works, sure.
    > Or ISO 800+ (and that on a P&S sensor).
    >
    >> Even a fill-in flash would help the
    >> aspiring P&S photographer moving to the "M",

    >
    > ... thus a flash unit is bundled (not in all markets) ...
    >
    >> so I think the lack of
    >> built-in flash is a disincentive.

    >
    > ... for you.
    >
    > Which typical P&S user uses flash in a creative, directed way?
    > And which P&S supports that well?
    >
    > -Wolfgang


    My experience is that you don't need a tripod to get satisfactory
    results from a P&S in less than "full daylight outside", and if that
    were the case, many P&S users would be returning their cameras.

    I'm not talking about "creative, directed" use of flash, just that the
    P&S user (and even some smartphone users) have come to expect a flash
    either for indoors use or perhaps for fill-in. Not having that on the
    "M" will lose them a capability. Having to carry around a separate
    flash unit (doubtless with its own battery and charger) is a poor
    solution (even if you are lucky enough to be offered it free), and
    suggests that Canon realise their mistake.

    Doubtless it will sell just on the brand name, though.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
    David Taylor, Aug 17, 2012
    #56
  17. David Taylor <> wrote:
    > On 16/08/2012 17:14, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> David Taylor <> wrote:


    >>> While I can see the space argument, you are wrong about a P&S needing
    >>> flash in all but full daylight.


    >> Tripod (in mild cases stabilizer) and long exposure works, sure.
    >> Or ISO 800+ (and that on a P&S sensor).


    >>> Even a fill-in flash would help the
    >>> aspiring P&S photographer moving to the "M",


    >> ... thus a flash unit is bundled (not in all markets) ...


    >>> so I think the lack of
    >>> built-in flash is a disincentive.


    >> ... for you.


    >> Which typical P&S user uses flash in a creative, directed way?
    >> And which P&S supports that well?


    > My experience is that you don't need a tripod to get satisfactory
    > results from a P&S in less than "full daylight outside", and if that
    > were the case, many P&S users would be returning their cameras.


    - you are easily satisfied
    - the P&S are using flash
    - the P&S are not shooting people, but static objects and are
    using stabilizers and favourable conditions

    > I'm not talking about "creative, directed" use of flash, just that the
    > P&S user (and even some smartphone users) have come to expect a flash
    > either for indoors use


    Which the M does not need!

    > or perhaps for fill-in.


    external flash supplied.

    > Not having that on the
    > "M" will lose them a capability.


    hotshoe built in.

    > Having to carry around a separate
    > flash unit (doubtless with its own battery and charger)


    standard AA or maybe AAA cells.

    > is a poor
    > solution (even if you are lucky enough to be offered it free), and
    > suggests that Canon realise their mistake.


    Adding a pop-up flash is an even worse solution:
    - there's no room for one (unless you make the camera a lot larger)
    - a pop up would have to pop up rather high, which makes the
    mechanics of it either weak or large and heavy.
    - the battery wouldn't like the additional drain, so you need a
    larger battery --- making the camera larger again.
    - for most situations a P&S *needs* a flash where the M doesn't.

    A larger camera would be less attractive.

    > Doubtless it will sell just on the brand name, though.


    Doubtless you won't buy it, since you only want cameras with
    inbuilt flashes.

    -Wolf'proud owner of a flashless camera with a hotshoe'gang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Aug 17, 2012
    #57
    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