Gergwheel1647545492 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 http://digital-photography-school.com/canon-eos-m-announced Looks super cool, i would like to get one of these depending on the price point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) You can by far do better with a traditional SLR and Lens line up. Depends on what you're really looking to do though. In short, I'm not a fan of mirrorless cameras like this. IMO, for many reason, I'd much rather have a traditional DSLR and Lens line up. Where size is a concern, any of the newer P&S and bridge cameras can do just as well for far less money. Talk to me about what you want and need. The only real advantages over a traditional G12'ish P&S/Bridge camera are size and speed of AF/shots. Here's a little better preview of it too. http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-m/ Edited July 23, 2012 by TTQ B4U Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I'm so torn on these cameras. Nikon V1 came out and I was like WHOAH..then I realized it wasn't so small once you carried around the lenses and I should probably buy a DSLR instead. Sony NEX-7 same thing, holy crap, that thing is nice. Even got to play with one and loved it. Looked at the cost, and all I saw was DSLR.. Our P&S's are Both Canon's (SX35 & G12). The SX is the mega zoomer and the G12 has really good low light, more options, and over all better quality. I can't see going anywhere else from here, than to a DSLR and enjoy all 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1fynz Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I went with the Panasonic GX1 for a camera to take with me everywhere when I didn't want the bulk of my 7d. It has far and away been one of my favorite purchases. Paired with the 20mm f/1.7 the thing takes incredible pictures. The smaller sensor certainly has drawbacks, ISO performance at the top of the list, but as a compliment to a DSLR it is exactly what I was looking for. I am intrigued by this though, as I do have a lot of EF lenses, however the lack of physical buttons is off-putting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gergwheel1647545492 Posted July 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 yea i agree, for the money you can buy a really nice DSLR and be ahead of the game money wise. yes its bulkier. but i can't see a chick wanting to put this in her purse and take it to the bar. I don't see the use for these. but they are sexy and cool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) Updated Preview for what it's worth. IMO not having a viewfinder is horrible unless it's a $150 P&S. Use one and you'll see. http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07/24/canon_eos_m_preview_updated For the money, I'd go with the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS. In fact I'm likely going to go pick one up Wednesday to play with while in on our upcoming vacation. It certainly won't replace my DSLR and 800mm lens but it will allow me to avoid carrying 4-16lbs of gear with me. That's priceless. Target has them for $399 and if you use your target card you get another 5% off that so it will come to $379. Could buy it online too and avoid tax. http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX40_HS/ Excellent sensor. Canon kicks the hell out of Panny and Sony in terms of internal processing too. Good feature set and video production capabilities and the optics overall are strong. Edited July 24, 2012 by TTQ B4U Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Details and my initial preview thoughts on the SX40 coming this evening. It's charging up now and I'll likely head out to the river/park later today to test it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gergwheel1647545492 Posted July 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 just out of curiosity what did it cost you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 just out of curiosity what did it cost you? Just as noted above, $370 at Target (with my 5% card discount) and picked up an High Speed 32gb SD Card for $60 less 5% too. Cheap for what you get. Seriously. I may just take this with me and leave my DLSR at home on our vacation. Here's an initial two shot comparison showing wide and tele range. Right out of camera other than my cropping and labeling. http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/144973655/original.jpg Off to do some bokeh and optics quality testing now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Had the SX35 since it came out. I'm not a photo guru like yourself, but It's been a great camera and we take it all over when we vacation and it's never let us down. Love the zoom range and being able to capture stuff at a distance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 I think the SX40 is supposed to have better low light and better performance over-all with the same awesome range. I've considered picking one up to replace the old 35! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Here's a good example of a couple things: Testing out the IS; how's 1/25th, hand-held at 100mm. That's impressive. That's essentially 3-4 stops of movement control which is on par with some of my L-Series SLR Glass. Bokeh....not bad. Not L-Series quality, but then a 28-300mm L lens will cost you about $3,600. This one goes to 840mm and that will run you $12k and weigh in at nearly 14lbs. So, yeah, I'm happy. The optics are 7.5 out of 10 but that's because I'm being pretty damn picky. I can easily move the optics to a solid 8 when compared to other Bridge cameras. The circles are solid and milky but not as smooth as I'd like to see. My 11yr old Sony has a Leica Designed lens and blows it away, but it only reaches to 200mm. http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/144973800/original.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) I think the SX40 is supposed to have better low light and better performance over-all with the same awesome range. I've considered picking one up to replace the old 35! I thought you had one similar. Yes, the 40 moved to a CMOS Sensor and back to 12mp from 14mp. The resolution difference is nill, especially since the CMOS they use in this one is stellar. Lower pixel to pixel noise and now full 1080P, although at 24fps vs 60fps. However, still very, very usable. I won't be disappointed I'm sure. It's just a matter of panning slow and not trying to shoot a soccer game with it. This camera would be killer for National Trail Vids though. Another nice thing about the optics, no purple fringing or CA effect, even at full zoom. Can't say that much about many mid zoom cameras let alone a super zoom one. 840mm cropped from original with an even deeper 100% crop included. http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/144974033/original.jpg Edited July 25, 2012 by TTQ B4U Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokey Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Since Tim is offering up great advice in this thread, I'll jump in with my own questions. Like others here, I've been very tempted by the mirrorless concept. The idea of being able to take good quality photos without the hassle of lugging around a full DSLR is very appealing. My concern is that apart from using the pancake lenses on these, they're not really able to be put in a pocket and easily carried around. If you want to use a nice lense on a mirrorless camera, then you need a case, and then at that point what's the difference between that and a crop body DSLR? Additionally, I'm interested to know if I can have a camera that will also do well with video. Now that my wife and I have our son, i notice the desire to take video and I'm just doing it with my camera phone. While that's nice to be easy to share, I know I'm going to kick myself down the road because the quality sucks on anything bigger than a phone screen. Supposedly the mirrorless cameras and specifically the Panasonics are better at video than most DSLRs, is that true? Should I just buy a seperate video camera and live with having 2 devices and costs? I know my limitations, I'm not going to be a great photographer, even if I had the talent, I don't have the time to dedicate to getting up to the level of some of the people here. I do, however, want to be able to take good shots, of good quality that I can be happy to show others and hang onto as memories. I have an older Olympus P&S that gets by, but also has definite limitations. I would like to take pictures and video of my family, and perhaps work on taking good pictures of my cars (remote flash setup anyone?) and watches. I believe I am the target "bridge camera" market, but what's the right choice for me? Is there something that's reasonably sized so I'll actually be willing to take it around, can take good photos, and do video as well? Am I dreaming up a product that doesn't exist yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Like others here, I've been very tempted by the mirrorless concept. The idea of being able to take good quality photos without the hassle of lugging around a full DSLR is very appealing. My concern is that apart from using the pancake lenses on these, they're not really able to be put in a pocket and easily carried around. If you want to use a nice lense on a mirrorless camera, then you need a case, and then at that point what's the difference between that and a crop body DSLR? The first question that I look at in threads like this is what about a is being deemed as a mirror-less camera is appealing? The industry benefit is essentially interchangeable lenses on a camera using an SLR quality sensor in a small size. Hmmm...all that can easily be achieved with others too yet with more versatility. However, again, what are you looking for in the camera? Your essentially right in that you will need a case, but in reality, outside a pocket camera, you will still likely need one or at least should use one. Additionally, I'm interested to know if I can have a camera that will also do well with video. Now that my wife and I have our son, i notice the desire to take video and I'm just doing it with my camera phone. While that's nice to be easy to share, I know I'm going to kick myself down the road because the quality sucks on anything bigger than a phone screen. Supposedly the mirrorless cameras and specifically the Panasonics are better at video than most DSLRs, is that true? Should I just buy a seperate video camera and live with having 2 devices and costs?in terms of video, yes, there are some good options there for video combined with a camera. the iPhone, my DLSR, the mirrorless cams or even this Canon SX40 I'm new to owning does 1080P but with 24fps counts. That has it's advantages yet also drawbacks in terms of rolling shutter artefacts on motion centric clips. Panny and Sony offer a bit more there on their zoom cameras, but at the cost of IQ on the sensor. It becomes the tradeoff. One nice thing they have in their super zooms that say this Canon SX40 doesn't (I know, thread high-jack) is the ability to shoot RAW. That is a drawback for someone like me that shoots exclusively RAW and without careful attention it can kill some shots. However, that said, you just have to work within the limits and know how to drive them so to speak. In terms of buying a camera, again, what are your main uses. If video comes first, then get one that does video better. However, compare that to a dedicated video camera and wiegh the costs. I'm not a video guy by any means. Not even close. However, I really enjoy the dedicated Sony CX line up and for the money, they can't be beat. Panny is about $100-$150 more and is a little nicer, but again, all relative. What I'm gathering is you like that ability combined with good still IQ. Here I will say, I'm right there with you. I won't use any of my Still or SLR's for video first but won't regret it they are all I have with me. They do pretty well actually. Shooting sports, kids running, or scenes that you will be moving fast on when panning, use a dedicated video camera. Otherwise, I wouldn't stress too much. I would like to take pictures and video of my family, and perhaps work on taking good pictures of my cars (remote flash setup anyone?) and watches.My insight: If stills take priority, buy a still camera. If video becomes job 1 then buy a dedicated video camera. Still cameras do a better job of shooting movies than video cams do at shooting stills. Both work for the other, but right now still cameras win in terms of versatility. Now in terms of remote flash set ups and what not, anywhere lighting is a focus, DSLR's are king. They meter way, way better and have more control. No contest there. I believe I am the target "bridge camera" market, but what's the right choice for me? Is there something that's reasonably sized so I'll actually be willing to take it around, can take good photos, and do video as well? Am I dreaming up a product that doesn't exist yet?Based on what you just shared, the Bridge Camera's are what you are describing today. The mirror less systems are nice, but you'll spend a ton more and IMO would best be served by a DSLR like what your brother has. Even with a series of kit lenses. If new baby is involved, I'd likely go that route but then I'm a still photo guy. However, I like video and if you do too, I can easily see spending the money on a nice camera there. Here's the bottom line based on your statements of where you stand, a good quality bridge camera will no doubt take you to levels and capabilities well beyond what you'll use now and will cost you about $500 all in. Add in a very nice 1080P digital video camera and that's another $500 all in. Damn nice combo of abilities with excellent quality on all sides with the bonus of even greater versatility. No mirrorless camera will get you close to all that. As Greg said above though, they are the cool thing :megusta: I hope my banter helps. It certainly fits Games 3 paragraphs of I don't give a fuck for his daily dose of Tim insight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 One nice thing they have in their super zooms that say this Canon SX40 doesn't (I know, thread high-jack) is the ability to shoot RAW. That is a drawback for someone like me that shoots exclusively RAW and without careful attention it can kill some shots. However, that said, you just have to work within the limits and know how to drive them so to speak. Have you tried CHDK? It enables RAW on 99% of Canon P&S's and I would be surprised if The SX40 wasn't supported. EDIT: http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK Looks like the SX40 is on the list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Have you tried CHDK? It enables RAW on 99% of Canon P&S's and I would be surprised if The SX40 wasn't supported. Looks like the SX40 is on the list. http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK Haven't done it yet. I've only had the camera for 3 hrs :gabe: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Haven't done it yet. I've only had the camera for 3 hrs :gabe: SLACKER GET YO RAW DOG ON Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokey Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 so Tim, pardon my stupidity, but what difference/features would I be missing if I had a SX-40 as my only camera and not a crop body DSLR? Just lense interchangeability and the features I could have with those other lenses? Would I be limited by this camera if I wanted to get into taking nicer shots of my cars with a remote flash system? I think that you're right, that the video is good for most things I'd want it for, and if I want something to do more action-oriented stuff with, then I'll have to get a seperate device for that. My draw to the mirrorless idea was that what I really want is a DSLR that will fit in my pocket. Mirrorless doesn't offer that, and it seems that nobody ever will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 SLACKER GET YO RAW DOG ON Done. She's now CR Stock :lolguy: I'm going to shoot .dng with this one to keep the file size and compatibility in check. So far, the software is pretty straight forward and menu's easy enough. Thanks for the reminder to check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 so Tim, pardon my stupidity, but what difference/features would I be missing if I had a SX-40 as my only camera and not a crop body DSLR? Just lense interchangeability and the features I could have with those other lenses? Would I be limited by this camera if I wanted to get into taking nicer shots of my cars with a remote flash system? No worries on Questions...here to help. Okay, so the difference between the two is big. The SX-40 and others like it (I like the term Bridge Cameras) are exactly that. They Bridge the gap between a P&S and DSLR in terms of features, but they lack all the true DSLR Capabilities. I won't get into all the differences here but can at say C&C or something, but yes, if you went bridge vs DSLR, you would be someone limited in using remote flash systems. However, not because of control ability but mainly in terms of cameras capabilities. In other words, you can set it up and do the shoot, but the end product still won't be DSLR quality in terms of sensors, lenses and metering. I think that you're right, that the video is good for most things I'd want it for, and if I want something to do more action-oriented stuff with, then I'll have to get a seperate device for that. Good call IMO. Dedicated video cams are so small anymore I can keep it in the pocket of my cargo shorts or in a small bag with ease. My draw to the mirrorless idea was that what I really want is a DSLR that will fit in my pocket. Mirrorless doesn't offer that, and it seems that nobody ever will. Here too, mirrorless is far from a DSLR. They share the fact that lenses can be changed out and sensors are usually better leading to good IQ, but that's about it. Sensor IQ anymore is like splitting hairs. That leaves lenses and there too, unless you spend big money, you won't see the difference. This SX40 and it's competition models have good lenses and they will stack up and perform as good as any kit lens the entry level DSLR's and Mirror Less models are typically paired with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted August 12, 2012 Report Share Posted August 12, 2012 Had the SX35 since it came out. I'm not a photo guru like yourself, but It's been a great camera and we take it all over when we vacation and it's never let us down. Love the zoom range and being able to capture stuff at a distance. Here's a testament to it's reach. Full digital zoom which I normally don't like but this camera does well. It's in camera processing not only outputs a clean image but accounts for exposure too. I blew the highlights on this one a bit but it was just me playing around. This 3,360mm example is hand held at 1/125th too! That's unheard of at that zoom factor. Even my $12k 800mm couldn't' do that. http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/145347547/original.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.