New EOS M3 - finally o.k.?

sebr wrote in post #17421280
EF-M lenses are still somewhat smaller than EF or EF-S lenses making the entire thing smaller.

There might be some new lenses coming as well. Canonrumors points out that the promotional video shows a f/1.2 setting !! I am hoping for a 50/1.2 prime
http://www.canonrumors​.com/2015/02/an-ef-m-f1-2-lens/

They are quite a bit smaller. The biggest difference is, however, the body size. SL1 is narrower than a Rebel but a thick brick nevertheless, so I don't see much advantage over a Rebel - and it's substantially more cramped. The M (or any other similarly sized mirrorless) is tiny by comparison. Still not "pocketable" in a sense that it won't fit in my jeans, but I can stick my camera with a 16/2.8 pancake or 30/2.8 prime in my coat pocket easily.

I hope Canon releases more lenses and prices them reasonably, I like to have alternatives (although now I am somewhat happy with Sony).

Ugh,

No EVF.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17422150
Ugh,

No EVF.

Very best,

This right here...

botw wrote in post #17421618
The M is significantly smaller and lighter than the SL1. Here is a comparison showing the smallest full-frame wide-angle (6d with 17-40), the SL1 with 10-18, and the M with 11-22.

I get that, but while the whole SL1 package is... an inch, inch and a half longer? the M is not smaller enough, to me, to justify its restricted performance. Especially since it's only REALLY small with the pancake; after adding any zoom, it's bulky enough to be inconvenient, and then those lenses are M-only. Add the adapter and it gets worse. If it makes people happy, great! For me though, if the SL1 is too bulky, so is the M (and that's what the cell is for).

To each his own. I found the M (and my Sony mirrorless bodies) to be far smaller and more convenient than the Sl1. The Sl1 build quality is lacking - I'd rather have the smaller magnesium body. Or an a6000.

As to the viewfinder issue - many, like me, prefer the smaller body. But for what its worth, Canon is pricing the very aggressively in kits with the M3. From the amazon jp site, it looks like a kit with a viewfinder costs maybe 20-30 more.

The main difference is not in length, it's in thickness.

The thickness is what makes SL1 too thick for my small messenger bag and for my coat pocket - yet my Nex fits easily in both.

There's also quite a bit of difference in height.

Amamba wrote in post #17422953
The main difference is not in length, it's in thickness.

The thickness is what makes SL1 too thick for my small messenger bag and for my coat pocket - yet my Nex fits easily in both.

There's also quite a bit of difference in height.

Thickness and height. Mirrorless cameras are a lot shorter too.

Amamba wrote in post #17422953
The main difference is not in length, it's in thickness.

The thickness is what makes SL1 too thick for my small messenger bag and for my coat pocket - yet my Nex fits easily in both.

There's also quite a bit of difference in height.

Right, but I don't have a messenger bag, and since I live in Texas I rarely have a coat with serious pockets on. Camera lives on a strap on my neck, and at some point I'm sure I'll need a camera bag.

Edit! Also, both you and mystik aren't talking specifically about the M. Other mirrorless cameras, to me, pose a better case, because they have more native lenses. Using the EF adapter adds yet more bulk to the M if you need more than a couple of lenses.

Any idea how much ISO improvement there is between the M3 and the M1 sensors?

sebr wrote in post #17430302
Any idea how much ISO improvement there is between the M3 and the M1 sensors?

Links to full size samples here: http://www.dpreview.co​m/forums/post/55307712

This video shows the EVF from the G1X mkii working on the EOS M3.

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=6raSxmk3_4c


Heres the EVF:
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …w_wcB&is=REG&Q=​&A=details

Hrm,

I'd be interested to see user samples from the new EOS-M's to see if their ISO performance has improved at all. In some of those bright light shots at ISO 3200, that's not showing anything of the performance. The real samples would be in very low light, like those city shots in the dark. Where under exposure shows the grain hard. And looking at those, you can see the grain pretty easily at ISO 3200 ~ 6400 in the sky, clouds, etc, in the dark city shots. But that may be the user's fault too.

For example, I'd love to see the new M's be able to take ISO upwards of 512,000, for a usable 25,600 ISO, to basically gain a whole stop over the previous generation sensor. So that ISO 6400~12800 becomes pretty usable.

I'm able to get decent results from my first gen EOS-M's ISO performance:

ISO 3200:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/qh7d​Ko

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/r4fz​jR

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/q7BN​BH

sebr wrote in post #17430302
Any idea how much ISO improvement there is between the M3 and the M1 sensors?

This is Canon's description of the sensor:

" The EOS M3’s APS-C size 24.2 Megapixel Canon CMOS sensor has gapless microlenses to help deliver images and movies with stunning detail, colour and atmosphere. Pixels equipped with gapless microlenses maximise the sensor area, allowing each pixel to be more sensitive to light and yield less digital noise (especially at high ISO) making them ideal for capturing scenes in challenging light.

Larger pixels also have the capacity to provide a wider dynamic range, while the APS-C sensor size allows creative depth-of-field for more professional looking bokeh."

Since it's the same sensor as the new Rebel body, I'm fairly certain Canon is using the new manufacturing process for the sensor. This is the same sensor manufacturing as the 7D Mark II and new 5D 50MP bodies. I've not seen any real world comparisons yet regarding the M3 ISO performance.

Since it's not available in the US, I am not interested. No jumping through hoops / ordering from Japan / not getting warranty on camera and lenses just because Canon did something new.

They are still not serious about mirrorless market, pity.

Amamba wrote in post #17458299
Since it's not available in the US, I am not interested. No jumping through hoops / ordering from Japan / not getting warranty on camera and lenses just because Canon did something new.

They are still not serious about mirrorless market, pity.

I think they are serious about mirror-less. Canon seems to have determined that the U.S. market isn't a viable one for sales, and they're focusing on the Asian and European markets where apparently there is a stronger interest.