Not trying to replicate Canon rumors but some of them are almost official now.
we talked about lenses already.
It seems a flagship EOS R is coming with 5 axis IBIS, officials even confirmed IBIS.
a patent for a product caught my attention it's EF to EFM adapter with speed booster 0.8 magnification, and flare cutting diaphragms. If it confirms that would be a very neat product
Which is why I didn't buy the EOS R yet. ;-)
Read illogical rumors about APS-C EOS R which doesn't make sense in the presence of EOS M
My next camera will be a Canon mirrorless my experience with Sony hasn't been very encouraging especially reliability issues and recurrent failures (shutter button failing, overheating, camera freezing) lame software
EOS M is going to die soon. That system just doesn't make any sense.
EOS M sells well, and will remain an APS-C option from Canon. It sells better than Fuji X.
(12-13-2018, 09:00 AM)Klaus Wrote: [ -> ]EOS M is going to die soon. That system just doesn't make any sense.
Why does it not make any sense?
After all, not everyone want or need a 135 format system (with large and very expensive lenses).
If Canon were to provides descent bodies and lenses for their EOS-M mount, the system would be quite attractive actually.
They are just too short sighted to see it (as Nikon it seems).
(12-13-2018, 02:04 PM)thxbb12 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2018, 09:00 AM)Klaus Wrote: [ -> ]EOS M is going to die soon. That system just doesn't make any sense.
Why does it not make any sense?
After all, not everyone want or need a 135 format system (with large and very expensive lenses).
If Canon were to provides descent bodies and lenses for their EOS-M mount, the system would be quite attractive actually.
They are just too short sighted to see it (as Nikon it seems).
I think this segment is already occupied by oter APS-C or µ4/3 manufacturers. The only thing Canon could do was gving the users long teles - these lack in a Fuji system. But then, these teles are not cheap nor lightweight...
Nonsense.
If there is one mirrorless segment that's over-crowded it's the 135 format: Sony, Canon, Nikon and now the L-mount aliance (Panasonic, Leica, Sigma).
On the other hand, only Fuji and Canon are present in the ML APS-C segment. MFT is not APS-C. Being a smaller format, it tends to cater to different needs.
Nonsense
Count the camera models and then rethink "overcrowded"... and from the L-mount alliance there's still the first model to hit the shelves. So don't count non-existing choices in.
And also, don't forget Sony's APS-C attempts.
Given the small differences in size and costs, I really want to know why going on with APS-C. Each FF can do it as well, if it's only the crop factor.
(12-13-2018, 04:34 PM)JJ_SO Wrote: [ -> ]Nonsense
Count the camera models and then rethink "overcrowded"... and from the L-mount alliance there's still the first model to hit the shelves. So don't count non-existing choices in.
And also, don't forget Sony's APS-C attempts.
Given the small differences in size and costs, I really want to know why going on with APS-C. Each FF can do it as well, if it's only the crop factor.
There is Leica in the L-mount alliance and they have bodies available today.
I'm talking about manufacturers. The 135 format is going to get overcrowded very fast.
Granted, I forgot about Sony APS-C but clearly Sony doesn't care about it, focusing exclusively on 135. The 135 format has many more players than in ML APS-C. This is fact.
In terms of cost, there is a huge difference between ML 135 and ML APS-C.
For instance a Fuji X-T100 or an EOS-M50 can be had with a kit lens for 600 CHF. Where can I get a ML 135 for that price?
If one consider MFT, an Olympus E-M10 Mk II with kit lens can be had for 450 CHF.
Why do everyone think that the 135 format is the solution to everything?