CanonWatch spotted and interesting interview made by Asciijp with Canon manager Yagi Koichi:
Canon Marketing Japan Imaging System Company, president Yagi Koichi Managing Executive Officer [says] “in the third quarter and fourth quarter of 2015, we have been able to ship a lot of mirror-less […] cameras, [but we are] not yet satisfied […]. At present [we are working on] new products, but [we can not] mention, the third quarter in 2016, towards the fourth quarter and that the mirror-less market is forecast to grow, Canon’s share of the mirror-less camera market [in the last] two years ago [was] the 4. position, we want to aim at the 3. position [intended as ranking, editor’s note]. By all means [we want to get the] second place this year […]. And, because second place [is the] middle of the goal, [as] soon as possible [we] want to take the seat of the number one[…].
Within the interview Canon makes it clear:
- They want to focus on the mirrorless system camera development
- They hint more “premium” (FF?) mirrorless system cameras could come in late 2016
- They want to become the second player on the market (behind Sony). This would mean surpass MFT and Fuji within 2016.
I am not sure what Canon’s plan is. The EOS-M system has basically ZERO lens development. So if they are going FF will they abandon APS-C lens development just like Sony did?
58 Responses
I heard the 22mm is a good lens. I’d like to see a fantastic camera to go with it.
Other manufactures are too many years ahead. Maybe Canon Users will adapt some favorite lenses for the beginning. But until Canon can provide a decent amount of lenses, probably not many people will change.
Now the big question.. will they join the retro design club or not? a Rangefinder design like the Canonet would be great, but somehow i doubt it.
And yet Canon still managed to out sell Fuji or Panasonic in MIRRORLESS!! You’re thinking about gear heads… most cameras aren’t sold to gear heads… the Brand still counts for a whole lot with people who don’t know what aperture or focal length mean and that is the majority of buyers…
yeah, a lot of people buying nikon and canon dslr and just use it with the kit lens and in auto mode for vacation and stuff. but their are alot of them buying m43 aswell.. Fuji maybe not.. because it hasnt an auto mode and too much manual controls.
i am curious about a premium canon mirrorless.. this isn’t aimed for people who dont know what aperture is
yeah but I wouldn’t be too sure about the M43 people either… I see A LOT of E-M5 with kit lenses out there… I think Canon and Nikon will simply have to come out with an amazing adapter and that will be the transition before they have enough mirrorless lenses… don’t forget
Canon did it once before, when EOS EF came out all FD lenses where more or less useless over night… but not only did they survive giving up all the FD lenses they were even stronger than ever before…
right. Canon with over 50% in DSLR market won’t have it easy to move on to mirrorless, but they will remain Canon! they have their namebrand on the camera. They could even design the camera with a thicker body, so that the EOS Lenses would fit the sensor in there. Wouldnt be compact and you would have a lot of empty space in the camera. maybe they come up with a design where the adapter is integreted.
they still won’t have it easy.. I just hope for FullFrame. They shouldn’t waste time without even beeing a competer to Sony. Just wondering when Nikon moves to Mirrorless.. Now with Canon changing direction, Nikon really has to move
I think its too early for a EOS-M FF model. Canon should first get up from the low end mirrorless market to the high end APS-C mirrorless market.
I have to disagree. The EOS-M series ARE aimed at youth and soccer moms that dont know what aperture is or ever buy a second lens. Canon need a pro model with EVF more aimed at the pro users to be taken seriously in the mirrorless market and increase lens sales. I believe they can, but it will be more difficult then selling cheap EOS-M models to soccer moms at wallmart.
thats what i mean. i agree with you. Canon need to shoot at the pros immediately
So true!
Someone I know just got a canon DSLR because you must have a DSLR to take good pictures…
…and you need a Canon or Nikon…
Yep. Canon got #3 purely from the EOS-M, which, if any other manufacturer made it, it would have been a complete failure. Somehow, Canon can fail upwards because soooo many people bought the EOS-M to use with their Canon glass.
Don’t forget that sweet, sweet 22/2 though 🙂
Practically the system with the cheapest walkaround lens.. with great quality!
don’t forget samsung with 30/2
the rest of the world has forgotten samsung.
that M works like a charm from anyone that came from a smartphone background. the lenses are small, and cheap and good quality.
no one else is making good quality lenses that are small, lightweight and inexpensive.
Panasonic likes to have a word with you
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B014RD6RC0/ref=sr_1_1_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1455031862&sr=8-1&keywords=25mm+f1.7&condition=new
They also have the 12-32mm and a small 35-100 F4-5.6
Canon is really only good at selling mediocre stuff.
aw cute.
however odd how you left the one out of there .. the 11-22mm – got any cheap alternatives that are rated as well?
now let’s see the 20 1.7. has more CA, more distortion, isn’t even as sharp stopped down to 2.0 as the 22mm is wide open at 2.0
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Panasonic-LUMIX-G-20mm-F17-ASPH-on-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH2-versus-Canon-EF-M-22mm-F2-STM-on-Canon-EOS-M__534_677_989_819
and that’s even on a smaller sensor!
but I really did mean to mention APS-C and above because in the normal range, m43’s should be considerable easier to manufacture than their equiv aps-c or full frame lenses.
and you also forgot the word “good” in there.
I mentioned the 25mm which doesn’t have an eos M counterpart as it’s 50mm equiv.
The apsc sensors canon makes are no better the the 1-inch Sony sensor or recent micro four thirds.
So that difference is more or less irrelevant.
Yes Olympus has a similar UW angle with the 9-18mm F4-5.6. It was the same price after cashback.
cute.. you’re still trying.
after around ISO 800 or so .. there really is no comparison to any m43’s sensor and any APS-C sensor.. but keep trying.
the 9-18mm om.. let’s see . massive amount of CA, alot more distortion and not as sharp at any tested focal .. and more expensive.
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Olympus-MZUIKO-DIGITAL-ED-9-18mm-F4-56-on-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH2-versus-Canon-EF-M-11-22mm-F4-56-IS-STM-on-Canon-EOS-M__417_677_1170_819
again.. you miss the “good quality part” and again .. lenses designed for smaller sensors should be smaller and cheaper to build with acceptable quality. something called an image circle.
below iso 400 your typical Canon sensor DR is below that of that of a Panasonic CM-1 phone. Not to mention M43
M43 can keep up with the eos M 1-2 and m10 all the way up to Iso 6400 no problem. Thats what you get when recycling 2009 junk. The M3 has a small edge on noise performance but lags behind the apsc sensors of everyone else.
CA is auto corrected by both the camera and 3rd party software distortion as well.
It is indeed not as sharp but hey try putting a portrait on the eos M ow wait not available standard 50 equiv., prime nope not available. What about a macro lens? uhm nope.
And their lenses are smaller becouse of indeed the image circle.
So smaller package same quality greater versatility is epic win for m43 vs eos M
Greater quality and speed of the other Apsc mirrorless such as Sony and Fuji wrap it up.
The Canon Eos M system is just utter crap since the first came on the market
sigh.. you’re such a fanboy..
the point still stands whether you like or not, every lens you came up with fairs worse, and is more expensive – even WITH a smaller sensor, which again, you can’t seem to grasp the concept that the lenses for m43 should be better, and should be cheaper because they only have to project on a smaller image circle. instead they are not. distortion robs resolution, CA correction is never perfect.
instead, they are worse, and more expensive – and that is being tested with less mp’s even.
and like i ORIGINALLY stated, I should have mentioned aps-c and above because m43’s is too hard to compare objectively.
m43’s certainly makes a compelling system but I really was simply using aps-c systems as the measuring point – as i mentioned a while back.
PS .. it’s nice to know that m43’s can keep up with discontinued products, that are actually far cheaper than the ones you are comparing against.
I don’t even know what you’re arguing or who you’re arguing for, but I assume you’re a grown man? Using the word “cute” and related baby talk to emphasize your point is a lot of things, but creepy comes to mind first.
It’s just lens talk, right?
You are correct, many people tell me they prefer to stick to canon until I show them the a6000 but even then they sometimes still want the canon. The canon takes really nice pictures but the camera is pretty shitty in use.
not really. you are thinking that people like yourself make the vast amount of the camera industry sales.
i think that premium segment cameras arn’t buyed by not prefessional.. i’ve seen alot of people with canon 600d and even 70d without any knowledge of cameras, just using it for “snapshots”.. but i never seen one with a 5d or 1dx .. and canon is heading to that segment with their next mirrorless generation, as i understood it.
A lot of misinformation is being spread. I’m not a fan of Canon, but credit has to be given where it is due:
1) The EOS-M system is excellent. None of retro jewellery nonsense like Olympus and Fuji. Instead a simple and functional product. The system is currently designed as a companion to a DSLR, but Canon could decide to change this at any time they want.
2) Zero lens development? The Canon 22mm lens is the sharpest mirrorless pancake on the market. It is insanely much better than the Panasonic 20/1.7, urinates all over the Olympus 17/1.8, and all this at a fraction of the price. Canon chose to go for a small number of good M lenses, rather than flooding the market with lots of mediocre ones (e.g. Olympus).
3) Canon’s dual pixel APS-C and full frame sensors show that Canon is heavily invested in a mirrorless future. The EOS-M design closely mirrors Sony NEX. These are not coincidences.
System? You must be a blind Canon fanboy! BTW, M-3 is poorly featured, it can’t compete even with basic Fuji, Pana, Oly cams.
Tell me how many people need more than 5 lenses for a camera covering focal lengths from 17 to 300mm? All good quality.
Plus you have the adaptor. That makes all EF/EF-S lenses compatible with AF. If i need a macro lens i can adapt 4 native Canon lenses with perfectly working AF ans IS. How many micro 43 has?
Have you ever tried the M3? Or just repeating the forums?
The original M and M3 are built like a tank compared to the plastic micro 43 cameras below 1000$.
I had the original EOS M, Pana G3 and now i use Fuji X-E1. Cannot think of any feature the Fuji or G3 has extra, other than the EVF.
The EOS M is still just a complementary system but i would choose it over Sony APS-C for travel camera, studio photography, simply because of the better lenses and EF adaptor.
My friend owns a 5D2 and an EOS M3. He bought it to dip his toes into mirrorless with his existing lenses and have a smaller camera to carry around. We were at a friend’s wedding doing some casual shooting, and he handed me the EOS M3, and I handed him my EM10. The EOS M3 does not in any way come close to even the responsiveness of an EM10… let alone the other mirrorless offerings that are much more responsive. At the end of that, my friend wished he could attach his Canon L glass to my EM10 with AF.
Camera is too sluggish and unreliable to AF. It also has poor ergonomics for such an expensive camera (except for the fire sales).
“We were at a friend’s wedding doing some casual shooting,” LOL
M3 has not only poooor AF, but no dial and buttons for direct access to mamy many features, it’s the worst APS-C cam I tried to shot among Fuji, Sony and Samsung. It’s for point-and-shot users.
it really is a shame. I am a sony shooter but I tried my best to like the m3 but it’s just shitty although I do like the image quality.
You ARE a fan of Canon if you think the EOS-M was anything other than a warmed over option made for existing Canon glass owners only. Its sluggish, the feature-set/ergonomics aren’t great, and its original asking price was ridiculous. Not to mention Canon APS-C sensors offer next to no benefit in practical IQ compared to m43’s… let alone any advantage whatsoever against Fuji or Sony.
Also, one good lens does not a system make. The EOS-M was saved purely based on its ability to use existing Canon glass. If they don’t revise the camera to actually compete objectively with the rest of the mirrorless world, I doubt existing Canon owners would care to upgrade.
You obviously didn’t care to read my post carefully. I argued that Canon designed the M to be a complementary system, for the moment.
The second they upgrade it with a dual pixel AF sensor and add one or two more primes, they will be more than competitive.
I have shot Olympus for years. It is all eye candy. Yeah AF is snappy but their lenses are painfully soft. The sensors rate nicely on DXO but in real world use the images look digital and unpleasant. Plus those sensors are technically monochrome at ISO 800 and above.
I would not chose Canon either, but their tech is ready for them to step into the game at any point they want.
3 lenses total, isn’t it?
A 3000$ Canon mirrorless FF will certainly get media attention but it won’t sell like pancakes. The mass market isn’t there. Mass(er) market leans towards 800$-1500$ APS-C cameras.
I see improbable
I wouldn’t be surprised if Canon were already ahead of Fuji in mirrorless sales. While the Fuji cameras are without a doubt superior in every conceivable way, a ton of those EOS-M cameras have been selling purely because of the name on the front. Fuji has an incredibly loyal and dedicated – but small – user base.
I say once Nikon and and Canon REALLY get into Mirrorless (APS-C or FF) they will completely rule that market… The brand names account for A LOT… I think 90% of all dslr users only use the kit lenses and only know canon and nikon… Don’t underestimate how many people have 0 clue about the camera world… advertising does the rest… Not sure I’d like that, but I think that is what is going to happen + am quite annoyed by people who think what will happen is what they’d like to happen…
I don’t think that they will. I think it is too late for them. If they had done something 3 or 4 years ago, maybe. They both spent effort promoting mirrorless as entry level while others did the opposite. I think Canon and Nikon will slowly fade as their user base gets older.
All but a few people thought that Apple had lost (some 10 yeras ago) and would never amount to anything anymore. I think the ‘battle’ is just starting.
I would compare Canon and Nikon to Microsoft and Sony to Apple in your example.
It is very hard to turn a sinking battleship. GM succeeded, we will see if Nikon/Canon do.
Unfortunately I see that in photography customers are really anchored to old values and brands. The poor success of nx1 is the perfect demonstration of this. If Canikon release a mirrorless at the level of a 70d (d5300) at 1000$ it would sell like hot cakes imo.
That’s why samsung is leaving this market. They have the best apsc camera (nx1) and the best sub 500$ camera (nx500) and yet ppl prefer canon m. All said.
Nice announcement canon, right on the heals of your new 1DX Mark II
… um… is this by any chance a repost of their late 2014 message when Canon said that 2015 would be the year that took the mirrorless market by storm? Or more accurately, that Canon would be working to become number 1 in mirrorless by the end of 2015. I guess something like this makes for great press…
Again nothing specific… No regrets that I have finally posted my M1 + 3 lenses for sale last week.
The original Eos M was a big pile of dog shit, ergonomically speaking, not mentioning damn sluggish. On the good side, it now sell for less than 300 euros with lenses and flash, so you don’t fear to scratch it, and you can put on the alternate firmware Magic Lantern, which open a wide new area of fun. I never understood why they would feature a mic-in but no remote-in, instead using a bloody infrared remote. Or why they would not use the usual canon menus and functions. I mean when it focus, it makes great pictures! I hope they will finally make a great mirrorless…
funny. i handed an M to three people that never used a DSLR or a MILC before.
all of them without even looking at a manual or asking for instructions, used it, loved it and didn’t want to give it back.
so perhaps the pile of dog crap exists between your ears as far as figuring out who it was marketed for.
The problem with getting serious with mirrorless is that it will eat into the Rebel lineup, unless they skipped that market entirely and went upscale, to the full frame mirrorless market. But at that level, you’re not getting the lens line up, unless it was compatible with EF lens.
so? if the margins are around the same, I doubt canon would care less. but spout internet myth some more..
Rick, not spouting any myths here boss, please relax. Just saying that if they enter in the mirrorless market with an actually decent offering that it might gut their reliably profitable Rebel line up. Also hoping that when they do enter “seriously” that it is with an A72 type contender. Enough with this crippled and underwhelming M lineup.
the google translation is messed up.. not sure why bloggers dont’ CHECK japanese against multiple computer translators to see which ones make sense.
for a couple of points. this was japan’s domestic market, and they were actually saying .. last year we finished 3rd. this year we wish to finish 2nd.
small little details, and 10 second worth of work before posting just to verify would always be a good thing..
and LOL .. fuji? fuji’s near the bottom of japan marketshare.
I mean heck the CLUE should have been this was the executive in charge of Japan Marketing ..