Best Buy leaks new Canon DSLR?

http://gizmodo.com …mysterious-new-canon-dslr

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1284438

It looks like a fairly pointless product - if you want small, mirroless systems do that much better (and have better sensors, too), while, if you want an entry-level DSLR, the D3200 smokes any of the xxxD/Rebel line.

Shadowblade wrote in post #15727618
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1284438

It looks like a fairly pointless product - if you want small, mirroless systems do that much better (and have better sensors, too), while, if you want an entry-level DSLR, the D3200 smokes any of the xxxD/Rebel line.

Depends on the form factor of the camera

If they can somehow shove a mirror into a camera in a body the size of the EOS-M and price it well, it might be worth it. Imagine the form factor of a mirrorless, with the AF performance of a DSLR.

If you cared about AF performance at all, you wouldn't be getting an entry-level Canon DSLR anyway.

Shadowblade wrote in post #15727849
If you cared about AF performance at all, you wouldn't be getting an entry-level Canon DSLR anyway.

Not necessarily. The EOS-M and the mirrorless market as a whole is hindered by the relatively poor performance of contrast detect AF systems vs the phase detect systems in DSLR cameras (look at all the hate the EOS-M and Sony Nex get for their slow AF systems). Not everyone needs 61 autofocus points with a sophisticated focus tracking system, but, there are many people sitting on the fence of compact cameras, waiting for one that has an AF system that doesn’t suck. If Canon really has managed to design a dimunitive DSLR that’s only slightly larger than an EOS-M, it might be enough to push a lot of these consumers to buy…..even if only as a compact companion to a full featured DSLR.

Beyond that, Canon’s entry level DSLR’s have been getting hammered by mirrorless cameras. Consumers are figuring out that you can get the image quality of a DSLR in a compact camera. The EOS-M was slammed by reviewers (which entry level consumers base a lot of their decisions off of) for its AF system. Slimming down the Rebel is a necessary move to keep it relevant in the entry level market.

mystik610 wrote in post #15727947
Not necessarily. The EOS-M and the mirrorless market as a whole is hindered by the relatively poor performance of contrast detect AF systems vs the phase detect systems in DSLR cameras (look at all the hate the EOS-M and Sony Nex get for their slow AF systems). Not everyone needs 61 autofocus points with a sophisticated focus tracking system, but, there are many people sitting on the fence of compact cameras, waiting for one that has an AF system that doesn’t suck. If Canon really has managed to design a dimunitive DSLR that’s only slightly larger than an EOS-M, it might be enough to push a lot of these consumers to buy…..even if only as a compact companion to a full featured DSLR.

Beyond that, Canon’s entry level DSLR’s have been getting hammered by mirrorless cameras. Consumers are figuring out that you can get the image quality of a DSLR in a compact camera. The EOS-M was slammed by reviewers (which entry level consumers base a lot of their decisions off of) for its AF system. Slimming down the Rebel is a necessary move to keep it relevant in the entry level market.

How much smaller can they really make it.
http://camerasize.com/​compare/#98,351

When you look at the T3 Rebel, vs the EOS M, there is just no escaping that the room for the mirror box and viewfinder are taking up the vast majority of the increased space. I mean they could take away the grip, and the pop up flash, but that wouldn't decrease the overall size by much, and would just ruin the ergonomics and take away function, not to mention make it look wierd.

Olympus managed a great, fast, accurate mirrorless AF system, so it is possible.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #15731530
How much smaller can they really make it.
http://camerasize.com/​compare/#98,351

When you look at the T3 Rebel, vs the EOS M, there is just no escaping that the room for the mirror box and viewfinder are taking up the vast majority of the increased space. I mean they could take away the grip, and the pop up flash, but that wouldn't decrease the overall size by much, and would just ruin the ergonomics and take away function, not to mention make it look wierd.

Olympus managed a great, fast, accurate mirrorless AF system, so it is possible.

Looks like images of their new DSLR have leaked:

http://www.canonrumors​.com/category/photogra​phy/eos-b/

Not quite mirrorless small, but it looks like they shaved a good amount of the bulk off (its only slightly taller than the lens mount). I think they should have shaved off even more room by making the grip smaller and using a small pop-up flash like the NEX....would have sucked ergonomically, but mirrorless camears are not the best ergonomically either.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #15731530
How much smaller can they really make it.
http://camerasize.com/​compare/#98,351

When you look at the T3 Rebel, vs the EOS M, there is just no escaping that the room for the mirror box and viewfinder are taking up the vast majority of the increased space. I mean they could take away the grip, and the pop up flash, but that wouldn't decrease the overall size by much, and would just ruin the ergonomics and take away function, not to mention make it look wierd.

Olympus managed a great, fast, accurate mirrorless AF system, so it is possible.

yes, it doesn't seem all that much smaller than the rebel models

Given that it'll be competing against mirrorless crop bodies and entry-level DSLRs, the main issue isn't that the body isn't much smaller than current entry-level SLR models - it's that the lenses are still just as big.

Shadowblade wrote in post #15731649
Given that it'll be competing against mirrorless crop bodies and entry-level DSLRs, the main issue isn't that the body isn't much smaller than current entry-level SLR models - it's that the lenses are still just as big.

Well that's the same issue with mirrorless cameas too. The wider lenses are signficantly smaller as they save room by having a smaller mount, but the longer and zoom lenses made for mirrorless bodies are still pretty big.

Shadowblade wrote in post #15731649
Given that it'll be competing against mirrorless crop bodies and entry-level DSLRs, the main issue isn't that the body isn't much smaller than current entry-level SLR models - it's that the lenses are still just as big.

Absolutely. I purchased an OM-D to take on a vacation last year. The camera itself was pretty large in the mirrorless world, but the ability to carry it around with three lenses in a tiny, and light, camera bag was amazing.

Shadowblade wrote in post #15731649
Given that it'll be competing against mirrorless crop bodies and entry-level DSLRs, the main issue isn't that the body isn't much smaller than current entry-level SLR models - it's that the lenses are still just as big.

Well that's the same issue with mirrorless cameas too. The wider lenses are signficantly smaller as they save room by having a smaller mount, but the longer and zoom lenses made for mirrorless bodies are still pretty big.

Then you have people using adapters to slap DSLR lenses on mirrorless bodies, and ending with a smaller, but still bulky set-up again. Never understood the point.

mystik610 wrote in post #15731667
...Then you have people using adapters to slap DSLR lenses on mirrorless bodies, and ending with a smaller, but still bulky set-up again. Never understood the point.

I never understood why people never understood the point.

The ability to use EF lenses on the EOS-M is a bonus, not a requirement or negative. It allows you to use the EOS-M as a second body, video body, spouse's camera, etc., when you are carrying your main kit anyway.

Yet, you still see posts stating the compatibility is a negative point.

I never understood this.

Regarding the small Rebel (whatever it ends up being called), we'll see, but it seems to me to be a product in search of a niche.

RTPVid wrote in post #15731912
I never understood why people never understood the point.

The ability to use EF lenses on the EOS-M is a bonus, not a requirement or negative. It allows you to use the EOS-M as a second body, video body, spouse's camera, etc., when you are carrying your main kit anyway.

Yet, you still see posts stating the compatibility is a negative point.

I never understood this.

Regarding the small Rebel (whatever it ends up being called), we'll see, but it seems to me to be a product in search of a niche.

I get your point, but my point is that lenses, even lenses made specifically for APS-C mirrorless mounts, often make the size advantage of APS-C mirrorless cameras less relevant. The wider primes are pretty compact, but the longer lenses and the zooms, while smaller than their DSLR equivalent, are by no means compact.

And forget about fixed aperture zooms on an APS-C mirroless cameras. Very few exist outside of UWA lenses.

You’re right about mirrorless cameras being a nice compliment to a DSLR kit, but I don’t think they’re a replacement for one….not without some pretty big compromises

Billginthekeys wrote in post #15731664
Absolutely. I purchased an OM-D to take on a vacation last year. The camera itself was pretty large in the mirrorless world, but the ability to carry it around with three lenses in a tiny, and light, camera bag was amazing.

Agreed. I have an OM-D for trips and the ability to fit a body and 4 different lenses in a small tote bag makes it a no brainer. Even though a "mini" dSLR saves space, the lenses certainly do not. Unless this smokes m4/3 in Auto focus tracking and dynamic range its pointless.