Canon omitted the EOS M4 from the succession and went straight to the M5 because four is an unlucky number in Japan. Should they have considered the fate of the Leica M5?
This gallery is work in progress. I am planning to review the Canon EOS M, not as an overpriced £800 mirrorless wannabe but as a cheap and very cheerful £199 APS-C camera that is actually very competent. The EOS was damned by reports of slow autofocus. But is a solid camera, built in Japan, and performs well. The touch-screen interface is one of the best. Even the autofocus actually isn't all that bad after the latest firmware update.
Why has Leica abandoned the art of good viewfinder design. In the past an accessory viewfinder used to be an enhancement. The latest Visoflex is not an attractive piece of work. Could it be that Canon is showing the way?
Generally speaking, I have a love-hate relationship with these lists — you know the sort, the ten-best corkscrews ever invented, the 20 best nail clippers to let loose on your toes. But sometimes I do click to see what’s up……
So often in life we see what we want to see. I was aiming my new £199 Canon EOS M across a busy London road when, out of the corner of my eye I glimpsed what looked like a vintage camera, a Leica no less, on a bus advertisement. I punched the rear screen of the Canon right in the middle of poster as the bus passed. My eye registered the words Hector and Happiness at the same time.
I bought the Canon EOS M because it was cheap. £199 for an APS-C compact with an 28-88mm (equivalent) zoom has got to be worth considering. As I explained a couple of days ago, this camera started off as a much more expensive beast but seems to have been unloved. Perhaps there are better competitors out there at the original £700-plus price. But at £199 it takes some beating.
Why is it that neither Canon nor Nikon has made a serious attempts to take on the mirrorless kings, Fuji and Sony? There are now signs that Canon, at least is coming out to play....