I'm VERY pleased with this speaker. It surpasses my Bose Soundlink Mini II & my Sony SR30. More volume, great undistorted bass & treble in classical, classic rock, hard rock, & blues. The Sony & Bose were acceptable but died in under a year. I am hoping to have better longevity with this JBL.

I spent about 3 weeks choosing my next headphones and I ended up with Bose 700.My use case is a heavy music listener from classics to rock and DJ music, I frequently fly and take train to work, I often need to join conference calls while traveling. Noise Cancellation headphones is a necessity for me. Naturally, I was researching latest Sony MX3, Bose QC35 II and Bose 700. I ruled Sony out relatively fast due to requirement of phone calls and had to choose between 2 Bose options. Sony's mic is horrible. I went re-read many reviews on amazon with many mentioning 700 having issues with connection, mobile app and bad sound quality - specifically bass.Following recommendations I ordered QC35 II. Unexpectedly, Amazon had issues delivering these and I requested a refund. I thought it might be a sign from above... I stepped into the store and decided to try both pairs myself. After a short conversation with a seller pressured with the need to get a new pair I purchased Bose 700. Here are my observations after couple days of usage:1. You don't have to use Bose app to use these. Just go to Bluetooth menu and add these. The app also works perfectly for me.2. Noise Cancellation - I tested these right away on airplane and taxi. Works amazingly.3. Connectivity issue - works with no issues.4. Comfort - very comfortable. I can wear them for hours.5. Fast charge / USB C - **must**. I charged for 15 min to get couple hours of listening. Amazing. I also can use my Macbook pro charger to charge these. Love it.6. Sound Quality - I have to admit I miss the QC 35 II bass drive. However, these still sound like Bose. The sound is much cleaner - very transparent. I can distinguish every instrument in the orchestra while listening to the classical music. I test the speaker and saw that it is capable to produce amazing bass. When I put dance music the bass drive is very nice. I believe it is a matter of firmware upgrade to fix the issue.** I hope Bose is reading these notes and can come up with an update. Equalizer would be an amazing to tweak our listening experience. **7. Phone call quality is a treat for the business people.Don't think twice get this pair. The price difference is not that huge to think a lot.Note I'm just another buyer as most of you. Don't hesitate to ask questions if you have any. I don't mind sharing my experience.I don't think pictures are necessary. There are plenty of pics / videos out there.

Not much to say here, this device allows you to mount an EF lens onto your EOS-M camera, and appears to be well built. Done.

E600 sounds just as good as the more expensive E500. I am keeping the E600 and returning the E500. This E600 is the best in my opinion of all the Bluetooth portable loud speakers I tried. I have tried Ambramtek E500,Klipsch The Three II, Klipsch Heritage Wireless The One II, and Sony SRS-XB43. E600 is as good as E500, loud with plenty of bass and sound is very clear no matter how high the volume is. The only difference is E500 has equalizer so you can adjust the bass, treble, and mid individually for an extra $100. Disappointed with the bass for Klipsch and Sony. Abramtek is outstanding, I am really surprised how good its product, for a brand I never heard before. I consider myself very knowledgeable and an audiophile. And I usually don’t write review, but decided to write one since I am extremely happy with it.

I really loved it check out my Moon video, i used My 7D Mark II with EF 100-400 Mark II plus EF 2X extender IIIhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?t=18&v=ANYFuzYkGzM

HUGE UPGRADE from the EF II lens. Better bokeh given from the smoother aperture control, and the close focus range comes in handy quite a bit! Great for video, portraits and candids!Love it.

A few years ago, Peng-Toh and I were talking about mirrorless cameras. At that time, I'd spent some time with the EPL-1. The EPL-1 did a good job of pretending to be a good camera: shutter speeds were fast, and previewed images looked sharp and beautiful. But once you imported the images into Lightroom, the results were ugly: you quickly discovered that most of the time, the focus was off, and while the images were sometimes usable, they were never ones you were proud to share. Even photos from point and shoots such as the S90 were better. The consensus between Peng-Toh and I was that Canon would enter the mirrorless market, and do it right.Canon did enter the mirrorless market a few years ago, in the form of the EOS M, but it did everything wrong. Apparently, auto-focus was awful, so much so that I didn't even consider the camera. Peng-Toh did buy one, but he was disappointed. The one thing that Canon did right, apparently, was that the image quality was superb, but that was apparently insufficient to overcome all the other flaws.Canon had an EOS M3 sale during the holidays (and it's still running today). At $430, it's not cheap (though in the same ballpark as say, the Sony A6000), but online reviews indicated that Canon had solved the autofocus issues with the camera. The photo community seems to think that Canon isn't serious about mirrorless, and to some extent they're right: there are only 4 dedicated EFM lenses, and the M3 doesn't sport any high end features such as in-body image-stabilization, and Canon doesn't have any full frame mirrorless cameras like Sony.Pit against that, however, is that for any long lens work, you might as well stick the full frame EF lenses on the camera. Sure, the lens is huge compared to the camera, and you could have shaved a couple of hundred grams off the lens if you weren't carrying so much glass, but when you have a long lens that weight difference is really lost in the noise. Furthermore, those full frame mirrorless Sony cameras are very expensive, and when you come down to the same price level of the EOS M3, you get cameras like the Sony A6000. Even a cursory glance at the sample images comparing the EOS M3 to the A6000 using the kit lens easily reveals that the combination of a Canon lens and the EOS M3 utterly destroys the Sony equivalent as far as image quality. And if you're knowledgeable, you won't be shooting with the kit lens!With that in mind, I took the plunge and got the EOS M3 for my wife on her birthday. Along with the body, I purchased the EF-M 22/f2 and the EOS M mount adapter. We also bought and returned the EFM 18-55mm zoom. The zoom was surprisingly nice, but it had a strange color cast that I didn't find appealing.When building a new system, my philosophy is where possible build it around primes that provide roughly a doubling of focal length. So paired with the EFM-22, I got out my ancient EF 50mm/1.8. The two lenses yield a full-frame equivalent of a 35mm lens and an 80mm lens, which nicely covers the "normal" range, with the 80mm providing a great portrait lens. The 50mm together with the EF mount weigh just 80g more than the zoom, but provide a 1.8 maximum aperture which lets you isolate a subject in its surroundings. If Canon had made a wide angle prime EF-M lens, I would have bought it as well, since that's what's missing.When the camera arrived, I was impressed by how small it was, especially with the 22mm prime attached. It was tiny, just a bit bigger than the Sony RX100. But what blew me away was that my wife tried the camera, and then declared that she wasn't going to shoot with just her phone again. The biggest feature for her was the NFC wireless transmittal of photos from the camera to her smartphone. She'd always hated having to use lightroom to extract photos from a camera: by contrast, photos that go into her smartphone are immediately available for sharing and posting onto social networks. And the quality difference was obvious: this clearly is a DSLR in a point and shoot body.The nice thing about the EOS M3 if you're already a Canon user is that all your existing accessories work with it. My flashes and my collection of EF lenses were immediately compatible. When you put that together with high quality primes, it blew away anything produced by anyone who owns a crappy 18-200mm zoom instead of a decent lens. To put it all together, we went to a physical store and picked up a Think Tank Mirroless Mover 25i (after trying a bunch of other bags). It fit a flash, a mini tripod, the charger, and various other accouterments for serious shooting. In practice, Xiaoqin mostly carried it around with just the 22mm/f2 attached. With a 24MP image output, even severe cropping still grants usable photo quality.In practice, the camera produces superlative images. Low light performance is impressive:The biggest flaw in the camera is that shot-to-shot times are slow in one-shot mode, and the 50mm tends to hunt a bit. (An upgrade to the latest and greatest 50mm STM would probably solve this problem) But by far the biggest benefit is that the camera's much likely to be traveled with than my ancient EOS 5D2. That alone made my wife decide to keep the camera instead of sending it back to Amazon.Since I'm not the primary user of this camera, don't expect any long term reviews from me. But if you're a Canon user looking for a travel setup (especially if you're a landscape person who needs a camera for backcountry camping or cycling), I won't hesitate to recommend this to you. The image quality is superb, it's small and light (it's smaller than even the G series of point and shoots), and a landscape shooter won't have any issues whatsoever with the shot-to-shot times. Canon might not have "done it right" yet, but for someone who's got 2 kids and would like to travel with a serious camera that's nevertheless still light enough to bring on a trip, the M3 is an great alternative to the DSLR and produces far better photos than even the Sony RX100.Recommended.

I would recommend this lens to people who just starting photographyIt's not as expensive as some of the other prime lens for EF-M mount