Hint about what to expect from Canon's step into full frame mirrorless?

[fullstop]

Problem is, the idea of nerfing based on the battery (the battery, fer Christ's sake!) is actually the more complex one.

wow, you guys are a real piece of work ...

Battery life (charge) is a critical dimension in every mobile electronic product. be it smartphone, be it iWatch, be it GPS tracker, be it digital camera. no juice, no fun, right ?

Not only in real life use - Canon evidently does not care much about that - but also in marketing materials and in spec sheet comparisons. Canon marketing has learned about it by spending millions of dollars on market research, right?

Now look at all those internet sites comparing competing products' specs. Especially not so well-informed potential buyers of entry level products (see how i avoid the word "n00b") love to read those internet spec sheet comparisons, right? And their purchasing decisions might at least be influenced by them, if not outright based on them, right?

Now lets have a look how many and which important specs differentiate Canon EOS M5 and EOS M50 in those spec sheet comparisons, shall we?

eview summary: Canon M5 vs Canon M50
So what is the bottom line? Is the Canon M5 better than the Canon M50 or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.


Arguments in favor of the Canon EOS M5:
* Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
* More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1620k vs 1040k dots).
* Longer lasting: Can take more shots (295 versus 235) on a single battery charge.

* More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in September 2016).

Advantages of the Canon EOS M50:
* Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/24p vs 1080/60p).
* More flexible LCD: Has swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
* More affordable: Was released into a lower priced segment (20 percent cheaper at launch).
* More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 5 months) more recently.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the match-up finishes in a tie (4 points each).

Source: https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/canon-m5-vs-canon-m50

Had Canon marketing not nerfed EOS M50 by sticking an old, puny, whimpy battery into it, many of those internet spec-sheet comparisons match-ups would have ended in favor of EOS M50 over EOS M5. Canon marketing would not like that to happen, right?

So what did they do? So simple, stupid: they just "marketing differentiated" M50 by denying it the readily available, current power pack. Or in other words, they nerfed it. As I said from the start and all along. Not more, not less. quod erat demonstrandum. Case closed.

 

[rrcphoto]

Who would benefit most from having a battery which lasts 430+ shots = a full day of shooting for most EOS M50 users

the current LP-E12 will do that easily. because CIPA is using flash for 50% of your shots and turning off the camera and turning it back on for each 10 pictures, and also racking focus to it's extremes, each picture.

I easily got over 500 shots on my EOS-M without even trying, the M50 is far more eco friendly than the original M was.

so basically you are admitting that the LP-E12 is good enough for most users, and this conversation is entirely pointless.

Thanks for coming out .. /thread.

 

[fullstop]

Who would benefit most from having a battery which lasts 430+ shots = a full day of shooting for most EOS M50 users

the current LP-E12 will do that easily. because CIPA is using flash for 50% of your shots and turning off the camera and turning it back on for each 10 pictures, and also racking focus to it's extremes, each picture.

I easily got over 500 shots on my EOS-M without even trying, the M50 is far more eco friendly than the original M was.

so basically you are admitting that the LP-E12 is good enough for most users, and this conversation is entirely pointless.

Thanks for coming out .. /thread.

may i point out, that Canon EOS M /1st gen) does NOT have a built-in flash? On mine i get anywhere between 100 and 300 shots from a fully charged LP-E12. Depending on a number of parameters, eg temperature [not only in freezing cold], how frequently i turn it on/off, how much i chimp or not, what AF mode is activated, etc.

So before you try to lecture me, please read up on the facts, thanks.

 

[rrcphoto]

Who would benefit most from having a battery which lasts 430+ shots = a full day of shooting for most EOS M50 users

the current LP-E12 will do that easily. because CIPA is using flash for 50% of your shots and turning off the camera and turning it back on for each 10 pictures, and also racking focus to it's extremes, each picture.

I easily got over 500 shots on my EOS-M without even trying, the M50 is far more eco friendly than the original M was.

so basically you are admitting that the LP-E12 is good enough for most users, and this conversation is entirely pointless.

Thanks for coming out .. /thread.

may i point out, that Canon EOS M /1st gen) does NOT have a built-in flash? On mine i get anywhere between 100 and 300 shots from a fully charged LP-E12. Depending on a number of parameters, eg temperature [not only in freezing cold], how frequently i turn it on/off, how much i chimp or not, what AF mode is activated, etc.

So before you try to lecture me, please read up on the facts, thanks.

I didn't realize that the EOS-M and M2 are currently available and in production cameras.

Trying to move the goalposts when your argument obviously fails since we were talking about the M50 which has nothing to do with the battery usage on the M and M2, and MY usage was obviously better than yours. The fact of the M and M2 were simply illustrative points. did you not get that?

or did you miss the "M50 is far more eco friendly than the original M was."

The M and M2 are nowhere near as battery efficient as the M50. You *DID* know that... didn't you?
or did you just waste everyone's time with a completely nonsense 3+ pages of postings over nothing? That's fact if you knew or read anything at all about the CIPA battery testing cycle.

Getting 450+ shots on the M50 will be of no problem to the average user. You just admitted that is your criteria. Hell I could do that with the original M with no problems, just because you couldn't isn't my problem.

So you can get out of the basement, get off your dad's computer and find something better to do with your time now.

 

[Ozarker]

ah, and to return to thread topic, what to expect from Canon with full frame mirrorless ... the M50 battery nerfing further lowers my expectations for Canon's upcoming mirrorless FF system.

As many of you will know already ;D - my "wish-list" FF MILC would be something like a Sony RX-1R II size and form factor, with Sony sensor, Canon lens mount, Canon lenses, Canon RAWs, Canon touchscreen, Canon user interface, Canon menu system.

Now looking at that tiny Sony FF camera, it has a super tiny, light LiIon power pack, running on 3.6 V only, dates back to June 2012, but yet it packs 1240mAh. So from a pure logics point of view, in an LP-E17 sized battery there should be more charge possible in 2018 than merely 1040mAh.

Yes, i know the price Sony is charging for the RX1R II, but I don't think the power pack accounts for half of it.


---------------
Sony NP-BX1 Specifications
Battery type: Rechargeable Lithium-Ion power pack
Compatibility: Sony RX1R II & other selected Sony cameras
Voltage: 3.6V DC
Capacity: 1240mAh or 220 shots (CIPA) with the Sony RX1R II
Dimensions (W x H x D): 29 x 9 x 42mm
Weight: 25g

I think you should go to a Sony forum and lament that Sony doesn't produce cameras with an EF mount. That's what you should do. :

Your return makes me further doubt the benefits of reincarnation.

 

[fullstop]

the current LP-E12 will do that easily. because CIPA is using flash for 50% of your shots ...
...
I easily got over 500 shots on my EOS-M without even trying,

that's what you wrote. Obviously not having a clue.

LP-E12 is a whimpy, old battery in a 2018 camera. LP-E17 would probably have yielded close to 500 shots in real life. Not LP-E12. Sole reason why that weak old battery was stuck into M50 is marketing nerfing by Canon.

 

[Durf]

Well, it's actually a bit refreshing to see someone bitchin about the M50's battery more than the cameras lacking 4k capabilities.

Regardless, the M50 is what it is, which is basically; A lower end and lower cost starter level run and gun 1080p vlogging camera that can also take pretty decent snapshots too. Canon never claimed this camera would change the world of mirrorless cameras nor have they claimed it had outstanding battery life.

It's a starter camera with some cool features but lacking all the better things the more expensive cameras in Canon's line up (or other brands) have....want a better camera with a better battery???? go buy a friggin Sony A7iii for 2 grand, sheesh!

Want a half way decent little run and gun starter camera for 700 bucks or so with a flip out screen and pretty good 1080p video and something you can take decent snapshots with? Consider getting the M50....

Almost ever camera that's made now a days is better than what everyone was using 10 years ago, even this M50.

Most of the complaints about todays camera's are a bit ridiculous when you look at the bigger picture.

Many pros bought the original 5D mark 1 about 15 years ago and got great results with it and many made a living with it.....the cameras today may do more and be higher tech but that doesn't mean the 5D1 now takes worse pictures than it did a decade ago.....

But then again, what do I know? I'm just a 6D2 owner.......

 

[stevelee]

My guess is that people who tend to take many hundreds of pictures a day likely know who they are, and are more inclined to spend $50 on a spare battery, just in case.

I bought a spare battery for my first Rebel. I take a lot of pictures sometimes, but I never used that battery. I've never felt the need to buy an extra battery since. If I did a lot of camping away from electricity, so that I couldn't recharge things by night, then I'd likely get spare batteries.

And I'd get a new phone that will do wireless charging.

 

[fullstop]

Canon apologists' last stand: "well, it easily beats cameras from 10 years ago". Well, it better.

Other than the meak battery itself, what irks me "in general" is the displayed willingness by some, to put up with any sub-par stuff from Canon without even criticizing it. Or even worse, constantly apologizing and condoning it. Even in cases of blatant, conscious nerfing of products.

 

[Durf]

My guess is that people who tend to take many hundreds of pictures a day likely know who they are, and are more inclined to spend $50 on a spare battery, just in case.

I bought a spare battery for my first Rebel. I take a lot of pictures sometimes, but I never used that battery. I've never felt the need to buy an extra battery since. If I did a lot of camping away from electricity, so that I couldn't recharge things by night, then I'd likely get spare batteries.

And I'd get a new phone that will do wireless charging.

I always carry a spare "just in case". There's only been a couple times I've actually had to change a battery out in the field (with the 80D or 6D2) and one time was only after a very long day of macro shooting with live view on most of the day. Another time was walking out the door not realizing I had an almost a dead battery already in the camera.

If I did happen to buy the M50 I would buy an extra battery "just in case" because I know how I shoot and I'm often out in the middle of no where for long periods of time. (but I'd never buy a M50, it's too damn small!) lol

 

[Durf]

Canon apologists' last stand: "well, it easily beats cameras from 10 years ago". Well, it better.

Other than the meak battery itself, what irks me "in general" is the displayed willingness by some, to put up with any sub-par stuff from Canon without even criticizing it. Or even worse, constantly apologizing and condoning it. Even in cases of blatant, conscious nerfing of products.

You have every right to voice your opinions and criticisms; but you are sounding like a broken record.

 

[Ozarker]

Canon apologists' last stand: "well, it easily beats cameras from 10 years ago". Well, it better.

Other than the meak battery itself, what irks me "in general" is the displayed willingness by some, to put up with any sub-par stuff from Canon without even criticizing it. Or even worse, constantly apologizing and condoning it. Even in cases of blatant, conscious nerfing of products.

You have every right to voice your opinions and criticisms; but you are sounding like a broken record.

He's done this for years. There's a constant cloud of gloom over his head. Nothing makes him happy. He constantly extolls the the virtues of Sony, yet he keeps hanging around. This is his second incarnation on this forum. Strange, really. It's like listening to a metronome all day.

 

[Durf]

Canon apologists' last stand: "well, it easily beats cameras from 10 years ago". Well, it better.

Other than the meak battery itself, what irks me "in general" is the displayed willingness by some, to put up with any sub-par stuff from Canon without even criticizing it. Or even worse, constantly apologizing and condoning it. Even in cases of blatant, conscious nerfing of products.

You have every right to voice your opinions and criticisms; but you are sounding like a broken record.

He's done this for years. There's a constant cloud of gloom over his head. Nothing makes him happy. He constantly extolls the the virtues of Sony, yet he keeps hanging around. This is his second incarnation on this forum. Strange, really.

.... he should of chosen the handle "FullThrottle" instead of "FullStop" lol

 

[bwud]

My perspective from an electronics product design background: it’s almost inconceivable that anyone from Canon’s marketing organization dictated what battery be used in anything. It’s far more likely that marketing organization would have proposed a camera with some generic specifications and price point, and that the BOM cost trades undergone to facilitate the price led to the part selection.

But, it's so much more fun for forum dwellers to blame marketing departments, even though they have no clue how marketing departments work.

Here’s a real world way non-engineering influence can make its way into a product. In my area, we have business development people who are largely former engineers with wide knowledge of the systems we design/produce. They use that knowledge to dream up derivative products (take one of these, hook it to one of those, and you can do this much capability for that much cost) to our main offerings, and then they come to engineering with BD budget to design and fab prototypes. Then they show those prototypes to potential customers and, if one bites, the design is all but locked down, and the remaining funding goes to make it production worthy.

 

[rrcphoto]

the current LP-E12 will do that easily. because CIPA is using flash for 50% of your shots ...
...
I easily got over 500 shots on my EOS-M without even trying,

that's what you wrote. Obviously not having a clue.

LP-E12 is a whimpy, old battery in a 2018 camera. LP-E17 would probably have yielded close to 500 shots in real life. Not LP-E12. Sole reason why that weak old battery was stuck into M50 is marketing nerfing by Canon.

oh so now it's 500+

I'm curious how you know, considering that 235 shots with 875mAh is only 279 shots at 1040 mAh.

so it's a measly 44 freaking shots different. but it will get over 500 now with the LP-E17.

Got it.

Unless you are using my non CIPA M1/M2 numbers which then you are trying to fudge your own values .. once AGAIN.

and here's a news flash you can get after market LP-E12's around 1200 mAh in capacity. you can actually Get LP-E12's with LARGER capacity than you can aftermarket LP-E17's.

Which makes your entire posting in this thread absolutely pointless.

 

[dak723]

Canon apologists' last stand: "well, it easily beats cameras from 10 years ago". Well, it better.

Other than the meak battery itself, what irks me "in general" is the displayed willingness by some, to put up with any sub-par stuff from Canon without even criticizing it. Or even worse, constantly apologizing and condoning it. Even in cases of blatant, conscious nerfing of products.

So it bothers you that some folks are using their cameras and are satisfied or even very happy? That's pretty sad.
So you think we should all criticize products that don't do what - or work as well as - we think they should? To what purpose exactly? What does the criticizing accomplish?

Nothing, except showing how immature you are. Mature adults accept that companies make products based on what the company deems most appropriate to make a profit. Mature adults understand that companies do not make a product based on my particular needs and wants. If you don't like the product, every company understands that you may buy from another company.

Whiners don't seem to get the fact that when they whine, they say very little about Canon (or whatever company) they are whining about. They say A LOT about what type of person they are.

Don't know about you, but I would rather converse or interact with positive people. With people who share a common interest and enjoy talking and participating in that interest. So you can choose to be positive and happy - or you can choose to be a negative whiner.

 

[ahsanford]

Don't know about you, but I would rather converse or interact with positive people. With people who share a common interest and enjoy talking and participating in that interest. So you can choose to be positive and happy - or you can choose to be a negative whiner.

Agree with everything you said.

Unless it's about spot metering at an off-center AF point. That's a legit beef we all need to complain about.

- A

 

[fullstop]

no. we want to compare apples to apples. Canon OEM batteries to Canon batteries. CIPA numbers vs. CIPA numbers.

actual usage max shot numbers are not comparable, as they vary with usage scenario. they can be higher than CIPA, they can be lower than CIPA. As stated before. the difference betwen LP-E12 abd LP-E17 in the same camera will always be significant. possibly even more significant in a camera with better energy management, but i do not want to speculate.

on a side note: as to thirdparty batteries, well to each there own. personally, i trust the canon brand name and the specs they claim, a quite bit more than some anonymous aftermarket makers, who often write any funny numbers on their product. unless you can point me to serious reviews that tested various makes of Canon-compatible batteries and clearly show some to be superior to "original" canon branded ones, i personally will not consider them. all reports i have seen and my own experience are to the opposite. at best, thirdparty was only slightly weaker at purchase and lost charge capacity only somewhat faster than " original" canon. in one instance i had a thirdparty liion pack (not LP-E12 type) overheat and melt during first time charging. so buyer beware.

 

[Ian_of_glos]

Canon apologists' last stand: "well, it easily beats cameras from 10 years ago". Well, it better.

Other than the meak battery itself, what irks me "in general" is the displayed willingness by some, to put up with any sub-par stuff from Canon without even criticizing it. Or even worse, constantly apologizing and condoning it. Even in cases of blatant, conscious nerfing of products.

So it bothers you that some folks are using their cameras and are satisfied or even very happy? That's pretty sad.
So you think we should all criticize products that don't do what - or work as well as - we think they should? To what purpose exactly? What does the criticizing accomplish?

Nothing, except showing how immature you are. Mature adults accept that companies make products based on what the company deems most appropriate to make a profit. Mature adults understand that companies do not make a product based on my particular needs and wants. If you don't like the product, every company understands that you may buy from another company.

Whiners don't seem to get the fact that when they whine, they say very little about Canon (or whatever company) they are whining about. They say A LOT about what type of person they are.

Don't know about you, but I would rather converse or interact with positive people. With people who share a common interest and enjoy talking and participating in that interest. So you can choose to be positive and happy - or you can choose to be a negative whiner.

Those of us who are happy with the camera we own usually don't have any need to comment in forums such as this one, so it can sometimes appear that most people are unhappy with Canon products.
About a year ago I upgraded from a 5D mk3 to a 5D mk4 and I am absolutely delighted with it. The mk4 is a significant improvement over the mk3 and I don't feel as if the technology is 10 years old.
However, from time to time I do look around to see what else is available and there is no doubt that there are some excellent full frame cameras that are as good or even slightly better than 5D mk 4. Examples of this would be the Nikon D850, Sony A7 iii and Sony A9. Of these the only one I would seriously consider is the Nikon D850 but that is because I prefer the size and weight of a DSLR and I prefer to use an optical viewfinder. However, I have often asked myself whether the Nikon is so much better than the Canon 5D mk4 that it is time to change brands and the decision I always make is to stay with what I have. I don't think that the Nikon or either of the Sonys would allow me to improve the standard of my photography, even if they do have some features that the Canon lacks. If I could change my brain so it could somehow spot the photo opportunities that I always miss or allow me to change the composition to produce more effective and exciting results then that would be a far more worthwhile upgrade.

 

[fullstop]

Unless it's about spot metering at an off-center AF point. That's a legit beef we all need to complain about.

to you, not to me and not to many others.