Canon officially announces the EOS M200

[padam]

It's plenty enough for most people to shoot portraits in one-shot AF. A posing subject is typically a non-moving subject, and this camera is not aimed at catwalk, event, or action shooters. Now, pets on the other hand, that's where continuous AF definitely comes in handy, but I don't think Canon eye AF handles animal eyes yet!

I have used it on the EOS R until it received the firmware update, and it was hopeless to use it like that until that point.
No matter how we are looking at it, simply a silly thing to take out and unwilling to give it back, just because it was released at a time, when they "forgot" to take out 24p in 1080p.

 

[Sharlin]

No matter how we are looking at it, simply a silly thing to take out and unwilling to give it back

Take out? When the M50 was released, no Canon camera had eye detection in servo AF.

 

[padam]

Take out? When the M50 was released, no Canon camera had eye detection in servo AF.

Ok, left out.
But the point is, it is better designed than a 200D II or the M200, both of which have it (but at least 24p 1080p taken out), while that one won't, it is artificially limited just to have this many camera models in the first place, which is also not needed.
Of course all of this was laid out from the start by the marketing department, and if camera sales really do decrease, they will probably simplify it further in the coming years.
I just find it amusing, that people treat all of this with a warm welcome: more crippled = simpler, easier to use.

 

[slclick]

This one is pocketable with the 22mm, the 250D is not, no matter what.

No cargo shorts over 40

 

[josephandrews222]

Is it though? I mean, you can get a SL3 and lens for a hundred dollars more. Similar specs and it comes with a viewfinder and EF lens compatibility without an adapter. Not saying this isn't a nice little camera, just that it might not warrant two full "incredibles." Different bodies for different users I guess.

Thanks for your response.

I own (and use regularly while mated to the Canon EF 100-400 II) a 5DIII. I love it. I will continue to use it, especially for backyard birds and the like. For this usage, the optical viewfinder is essential.

I also use that body with the Canon EF 35mm f2 IS; great low-light and IS to boot.

But the EF format is almost yesterday's news...especially for young people such as my daughters...who love their Ms.

For the vast majority of today's photography newbies, I am quite confident that the smaller-and-lighter M200 (with the 15-45) is a better purchase, and will get used more, than the SL3 (FYI: I almost bought an SL2) you've described.

A lot of canonrumors readers whine about an anti-Canon bias over at DPReview. Whether or not that is true, I'm not certain.

But I do believe an anti-M bias exists here at canonrumors...and a goodly number of the posts in this thread serve as Exhibit A!

Repeat after me: Canon's (non-cinema) camera future revolves around two letters: R.

And M.

 

[josephandrews222]

Personally, I wish Canon would package the M200 with the much smaller and also cheaper EF-M 22 f/2 for say $499. Not a big fan of f/3.5-6.3 lenses...

I'm of two minds on this post. When the M (and I think the M2) were introduced, I think the kit lens was the EF-M 22. It is the lens that enabled my daughters to 'become' photographers. So I know what you're saying.

But I wonder if the general public might be more attracted to a package that includes 'a zoom lens!'. I think that's the bet Canon made.

Today, all of us have both (the 22 and the 15-45). I'm not sure which one my daughters use the most. I'll ask.

 

[magarity]

For the built-in flash?

It's hiding too well. Is it that clear-ish white circle on the front? Or is that a video light?

 

[jchung]

Just doesn’t seem to be a meaningful upgrade over the M100. Guess we’ll have to wait for the reviews to see if it performs better.

 

[slclick]

Thanks for your response.

I own (and use regularly while mated to the Canon EF 100-400 II) a 5DIII. I love it. I will continue to use it, especially for backyard birds and the like. For this usage, the optical viewfinder is essential.

I also use that body with the Canon EF 35mm f2 IS; great low-light and IS to boot.

But the EF format is almost yesterday's news...especially for young people such as my daughters...who love their Ms.

For the vast majority of today's photography newbies, I am quite confident that the smaller-and-lighter M200 (with the 15-45) is a better purchase, and will get used more, than the SL3 (FYI: I almost bought an SL2) you've described.

A lot of canonrumors readers whine about an anti-Canon bias over at DPReview. Whether or not that is true, I'm not certain.

But I do believe an anti-M bias exists here at canonrumors...and a goodly number of the posts in this thread serve as Exhibit A!

Repeat after me: Canon's (non-cinema) camera future revolves around two letters: R.

And M.

YMMV. I have seen and read a great deal of praise here by forumites concerning the M series and it's glass. I have owned an M5 and loved the 22 myself. I think your summation that there is a negative bias here is unfounded.

 

[slclick]

Just doesn’t seem to be a meaningful upgrade over the M100. Guess we’ll have to wait for the reviews to see if it performs better.

If it was so incredibly meaningful, wouldn't it jump ranks towards the M flagships (s)? You only get to be so good in your place in line.

 

[sebakunstpaul]

Ohhh well ... no mic input, that is just brilliant, not.

 

[zonoskar]

It's hiding too well. Is it that clear-ish white circle on the front? Or is that a video light?

That's probably the AF light. The flash is a pop-up type affair AFAIK.

 

[BillB]

YMMV. I have seen and read a great deal of praise here by forumites concerning the M series and it's glass. I have owned an M5 and loved the 22 myself. I think your summation that there is a negative bias here is unfounded.

The negativity about the M system seems to have mostly to do with what lenses are and are not available in the EF-M mount. Some people are less happy than others.

 

[Tugela]

This camera is a M50 repackaged in a different form factor, that is all. The specs are pretty much the same.

 

[dtaylor]

Considering that I let the batteries corrode in my 580EXII, that probably includes me.

My reaction to alkaline batteries is somewhat similar to the reaction of a vampire to sunlight. I use Eneloop rechargeables in everything. Even when something comes with free batteries they are trashed and I load Eneloops.

 

[BillB]

It is hard for me to believe that there will not be a replacement for the M5, or some other new camera with an integral EVF at a higher price point than the M200.

 

[jchung]

If it was so incredibly meaningful, wouldn't it jump ranks towards the M flagships (s)? You only get to be so good in your place in line.

Meaningful upgrades does not have to make it jump to a flagship camera. We’ll have to wait until the camera is in reviewers hands to see.

 

[Sharlin]

This camera is a M50 repackaged in a different form factor, that is all. The specs are pretty much the same.

Which is a pretty good deal all things considered. Seems the main non-physical difference is the M50 has faster continuous shooting and the M200 has eye AF in servo mode.

 

[slclick]

Meaningful upgrades does not have to make it jump to a flagship camera. We’ll have to wait until the camera is in reviewers hands to see.

'towards', you missed that word.

Also, add some specifics about your ciomplaint to put it in context within the M body ecosystem.

 

[SecureGSM]

Speaking of hot shoe, what's the little lightning bolt for on the menu selector if not for flash control?

Oh, pop up flash control?