When will Canon release a mirrorless camera?

Charlie wrote in post #17588321
I haven't heard of folks rushing out to get the M3...

IMO there's three main reasons:
- not promoted in the USA. I'd guess it is promoted more heavily in other markets
- small EF-M lens collection
- small ergonomically challenged body which doesn't really offer much in terms of functionality over a P&S

I don't know that Canon would make a killing if they converted their 7D/6D/5D/1D (Mark whatever) to mirrorless with an EVF but it would succeed a lot better than the EOS-M has.

It's also short sighted to keep the long register distance, some lenses could benefit from a short register distance, and it's easy to make a short distance long, but impossible the other direction.

The reason for poor AF performance is not due to register distance, but reliance on live view AF. Even Canon's dual pixel can't match their native AF, and ML is no different.

Cuttlefish wrote in post #17567574
I am hoping Canon will release a mirrorless camera that will work with Canon lenses that I use with my 7D

You can buy an adapter on Amazon for $38 that allows you to use all of your EF and EF-S lenses with the Canon EOS M mirrorless cameras... and still auto focus.

Part of the attraction with the EOS M, though, is it's very small size. With the EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake lens attached, I can fit the camera in a roomy pants pocket. Mounting an EF or EF-S lens on such a small body loses that size advantage. Personally, even though I own numerous EF lenses, I have not purchased this adapter, as the main reason I have the "M" is for the high image quality in such a small package. I just own the 22mm pancake and EF-M 18-55mm lenses. For everything else, I use a dSLR.

Thanks for the replies.
Is it easy to use the EOS-M in manual and to control depth of field?
It looks like a camera that takes snaps!

Cuttlefish wrote in post #17589274
Thanks for the replies.
Is it easy to use the EOS-M in manual and to control depth of field?
It looks like a camera that takes snaps!

The M has an APS-C sensor, so you can get the same depth of field as with any Canon crop body dSLR. The EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake provides a fast "normal" prime lens solution that is very compact. The control layout for the original M (which I own) is much different than a dSLR, but you can shoot in M, Av and Tv modes. The M3 changed the layout to be more "dSLR-like", but I have not tried that model.

The EOS M's biggest weakness is slower auto focusing, no viewfinder, and controls that require you to use the touch screen, so it's not really designed for fast action. However, it provides terrific image quality in a very small package, and the native EF-M lenses are considered better than the offerings from Sony.

I bought the EOS M last year during Canon's fire sale, when they were just dumping inventory. At the fire sale prices, the M cost less than most decent point & shoot cameras. It does not replace my dSLR's, but instead gives me another option to bring along a quality camera in situations where I would never bring my large dSLR.

Scott M wrote in post #17591285
I bought the EOS M last year during Canon's fire sale, when they were just dumping inventory. At the fire sale prices, the M cost less than most decent point & shoot cameras. It does not replace my dSLR's, but instead gives me another option to bring along a quality camera in situations where I would never bring my large dSLR.

That's the difference between the EOS M and the offerings from Sony. The EOS M will never replace a DSLR, but many users of the a6000 and the Sony a7 series are doing just that. I hang onto my 5DIII because for weddings and events, I need fast 2.8 zooms on a native mount for reliable AF. Outside of that, my 5DIII doesn't get used at all. If/when Sony releases native f2.8 zooms for the FE mount, my 5DIII is out the door.

mystik610 wrote in post #17591292
That's the difference between the EOS M and the offerings from Sony. The EOS M will never replace a DSLR, but many users of the a6000 and the Sony a7 series are doing just that. I hang onto my 5DIII because for weddings and events, I need fast 2.8 zooms on a native mount for reliable AF. Outside of that, my 5DIII doesn't get used at all. If/when Sony releases native f2.8 zooms for the FE mount, my 5DIII is out the door.

Yes, the Canon and Sony mirrorless offerings are very different cameras meeting very different needs. While the Sonys may be able to replace a dSLR for some people, it's not as compact a solution, and certainly cannot fit in a pants pocket, like the Canon.

Scott M wrote in post #17592096
Yes, the Canon and Sony mirrorless offerings are very different cameras meeting very different needs. While the Sonys may be able to replace a dSLR for some people, it's not as compact a solution, and certainly cannot fit in a pants pocket, like the Canon.

The a5100 disagrees

i love my EOS M, so much that I sold the DSLRs.

No mirrorless camera will replace a DSLR for action/wildlife shooting until someone puts a separate AF sensor into the camera. The problem with using the image sensor for AF is that you have two situations: static subjects where you can use the highly accurate but slow CDAF, and moving subjects where you can use faster on-chip PDAF (split pixels or however the tech is implemented). The problem with on-chip PDAF is that as the focus error approaches zero so does the information (phase error signal) from the PDAF. This means that the AF system is least sensitive when it's approximately correctly focused - and hopefully that's all the time when using predictive servo tracking. Additionally, the AF data must be read out from the chip just like image data, which means a delay which must be compensated for. These are not big issues for static or slow-moving subjects, but BIF and action sports would be extremely difficult to track in Servo for the above reasons.

Having a separate AF chip and the "synthetic" aperture (usually microlenses) which gives it phase info means that the sensitivity remains high even when the phase error is small, and response is therefore much faster. Additionally, the separate system with its larger baseline means that a faster lens can give faster and more precise AF if the camera allows for it. This is why DSLRs like the 1D, 5D, 7D series perform better with large aperture lenses. The on-chip PDAF does not benefit very much (except for improved low-light performance) from the larger aperture lens since its measuring points are much closer together.

Here's a recent article from Roger Clark on Mirrorless vs. DSLR status.

I will disagree there. I had an a6000 and it had zero issue keeping up with focus with shooting soccer games and any other faced paced action I threw at it. The downside of the camera is you will not be doing any BIF as there are no dedicated long lenses for it and using an adapter makes it useless for AF. but once there are actually lenses for long reach it will give DSLR a run for its money. I sold my 7D off and bought it and it focused just as fast and accurate as the 7D did. the only reason i didnt keep the system was the lack of lens selection especially at the long end