Canon Canon Introduces EOS Rebel SL1 - World's Smallest, Lightest APS-C DSLR

Isoterica

Hall of Famer
Dec 6, 2011
The SL1 while looking cute seems.. maybe pointless to me? It might be a fun step up for smaller camera owners even allowing them to use the full range of lenses via the same mount, however, I see lens tilt. I mean using the 100mm macro lens on my XSi/450D I feel a distinct pull forwards with a larger lens. The balance is off unless you have popeye wrists to exaggerate my point. It's like.. a weird niche thing kinda like the mirrorless EOS M that they didn't really commit to. The Rebel Blah5 is just a tweak. All of it together makes me wonder what they are going to REALLY come up with. The whole Crop vs FF thing doesn't bother me as I prefer the Crop, gets me closer in macro which is probably 75% of what I shoot. But I would like to see more improvement.
 

Archiver

Top Veteran
Jul 11, 2010
Melbourne, Australia
Fortunately, I'm long past the point where a new entry level DSLR would interest me, Unfortunately, face-slappingly expensive gear interests me now. And the OM-D is so neat and small, but versatile due to the grip, that it can become a fully-gripped min-pro camera or a jacket-pocketable semi-compact with a pancake lens and no grip. The mirror box of the SL1 is the restricting factor for size.
 

JJJPhoto

Regular
Jun 12, 2012
Fortunately, I'm long past the point where a new entry level DSLR would interest me, Unfortunately, face-slappingly expensive gear interests me now. And the OM-D is so neat and small, but versatile due to the grip, that it can become a fully-gripped min-pro camera or a jacket-pocketable semi-compact with a pancake lens and no grip. The mirror box of the SL1 is the restricting factor for size.
I agree the SL1 isn't as small as the OM-D but it's remarkably close for a "real" DSLR with optical viewfinder and the optical viewfinder is still important to some photographers. Don't get me wrong ... 9 of the 11 cameras I own for work and personal shooting are mirrorless cameras. Clearly I see the value of smaller cameras. The only thing that is unappealing to me about the SL1 is the fact it's a somewhat crippled entry-level camera while the OM-D and GH3 are a little smaller with significantly better performance and features for a modest increase in price.
 

entropic remnants

Hall of Famer
Mar 3, 2013
John Griggs
I agree the SL1 isn't as small as the OM-D but it's remarkably close for a "real" DSLR with optical viewfinder and the optical viewfinder is still important to some photographers. Don't get me wrong ... 9 of the 11 cameras I own for work and personal shooting are mirrorless cameras. Clearly I see the value of smaller cameras. The only thing that is unappealing to me about the SL1 is the fact it's a somewhat crippled entry-level camera while the OM-D and GH3 are a little smaller with significantly better performance and features for a modest increase in price.
Very true and I'd add the G5 to your final sentence as I think that's possibly a "value leader" in the mirrorless world. I like the E-M5 IBIS so it wouldn't be my choice, but if I had to get something very capable for very little money that's a great choice.
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
Melbourne, Australia
Fortunately, I'm long past the point where a new entry level DSLR would interest me, Unfortunately, face-slappingly expensive gear interests me now. And the OM-D is so neat and small, but versatile due to the grip, that it can become a fully-gripped min-pro camera or a jacket-pocketable semi-compact with a pancake lens and no grip. The mirror box of the SL1 is the restricting factor for size.
Even more unfortunately for me, only pimp-backhand-slappingly ridiculously expensive gear like Leica, Hasselblad and Red interests me now. :(
 

JJJPhoto

Regular
Jun 12, 2012
Would the Pentax K-01 have survived longer if it had been something like this (rather than being "mirrorless")?
Interesting question. Though to say for sure. The K-01 got a lot a of bad press because of the slow AF with the original firmware and that (combined with the high MSRP at launch, the unusual looks and the simple fact it is Pentax and not Canon or Nikon) pushed many people away. I'm sure the K-01 would have had faster AF if it had a traditional DSLR viewfinder and PDAF, but the firmware updates brought the K-01 in line with older Pentax DSLRs in terms of AF speeds so I'm not sure a mirror box and TTL viewfinder would have made a big difference. I own two K-01 bodies now and I'm happy with them.

I'd love to see Canon expand the category of pint-sized DSLRs with more than just entry-level specs and features. Professionals appreciate small and light gear as well. There is a market for more professional features and support in a smaller/lighter camera. I don't see why Canon can't make a camera body like the SL1 but put in the 61-point AF system from the 5D mk III, 6FPS or faster burst rate, basic weather sealing (like a Pentax K-30), a long-life shutter for working photographers who are going to put mileage on the camera, and make it eligible for the Canon Professional Services program (Rebel cameras aren't).

Sure, it would have to cost more than the SL1 but I suspect Canon could make the camera I just described and bring it to market in the same price range as the OM-D E-M5 and the Panasonic GH3 ... and a small pro-grade DSLR would give Canon shooters one less reason to switch to a mirrorless camera.
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom