Made with my Eos M & 40mm pancake....more of my images here at....http://thelazytravelphotographer.blogspot.com/2013/08/canon-eos-m-ef-40mm-f28-stm-pancake.html
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
All of the above is of note. Nice review. First of all, and +1 on the 40mm. With the adapter, it is my second "M prime" and is not too big or bulky. The photos are great.
But now I have the ability to grab my big stuff (no doubt it is so much more capable and versatile) or my little kit and go. It is a nice option.
That's a nice review, and yes, one can certainly make nice images with it. That said, a couple of your comments remind me of its drawbacks. As you say, this camera - like other small cameras - seems designed for those who want to be "always ready for a quick 'grab' shot". And not just professionals like you, but (mostly, I suspect) casual customers who think DSRLs and other cameras with lots of visible controls are too big/complicated/hard to use/expensive.
Ironically, though, it seems to me that it's far harder to take a good "quick grab shot" with an EOS-M than it is with a DSLR. Why? First, unless the subject is large, accurate focus takes a fair amount of time. The M's focus box is far too big for smallish subjects (especially if you're attempting selective shallow focus) and, unlike M43 cameras (and others), you can't make it smaller and stay smaller from shot to shot; instead you have to use the magnify box separately for each photo. While this usually results in accurate focus (but not always - sometimes the camera has flatly refused to focus at all for me, even when the subject filled the magnified box), the process is far removed from taking a "quick grab shot"; what takes a couple of seconds on a DSLR or OM-D takes much longer on the M.
Second, and related, as you say IS is more important with cameras that don't have a viewfinder; all lenses would benefit from it and, as Panasonic has come to realize with its latest M43 bodies, it should be in the body. So you have to be extra-careful when holding the camera.
Third (this matters less to me) the camera is just slow to use - not only does establishing focus take longer, but there's quite a lag between when you've taken a shot and when it will let you take the next one (write time? maybe it's shorter if you don't shoot RAW, but I'm not interested in that); photographing action must be rather frustrating, street-shooting maddening unless you're happy with narrow apertures that get everything in focus.
Maybe I'm just not sufficiently accustomed to using it, but it seems to me that the convenience of its small size and weight comes at the expense of inconvenience of use. Considering that my OM-D doesn't have a comparable expense and, given the tiny size of M43 lenses, weighs even less, I'm not sure I'll be keeping my M.
Another nice review, Ivan. Some nice images that are well presented. Keep sharing them!
I am looking forward to documenting my experiences with some legacy glass, and have both a M42-EF-M adapter coming along with a Konica AR adapter for a nice looking copy of the Konica Hexanon AR 50mm f/1.7 that I recently got and haven't been able to use yet.
Nice review! The 40mm looks like a great option for the EOS-M.
I have been using my EF 50 1.4 with my EOS-M recently (80mm 2.2 FF equivalent) and it makes a very nice portrait lens, but is a little bulky and heavy for the body. With the 40mm's tiny size it does not have that issue.
I agree, its a great camera for stationary or slow moving subjects... but I'll use one of my DSLR's if I want to shoot something moving quickly!
I don't have access to any competitors ILC's, so my only point of comparison was my 6D/7D and point & shoot S100.
Compared to the Leica X1, at four times the price, its got faster AF and a decent screen and a more solid feel...and altogether a much more responsive camera. The Nex's, are great cameras but , personally I think, let down by somewhat mediocre lenses. I make a living from photography and there is a tool for every job...and sometimes one tool can do almost everything...from that perspective my Eos M can do almost everything that I do with my 5D2, studio, interiors, architecture, people so its the perfect backup camera, small and inexpensive. But because its so small I also carry it with me everywhere, something that I am loathe to do with my 5D2...so yes the Eos M is pretty flawed but its got some very strong points, price and quality images being top of the list...and the AF, well I knew that it was slow before I even looked at it, so no disappointments there, but quite a few nice surprises that I have discovered along the way...
So to me, somehow this camera might make an ok backup and fun camera to carry around for candid and random shooting...but i think even for the UK, i will still bring along my 5D..just in case...because when the M fails, it REALLY fails
Would you bravely do the same if it were me or should i still bring the 5D3 just in case….i really am not looking forward to tugging it around London...
Someone on this board I believe has said multiple times that the strange thing about the M is that it benefits those who already know about photography/cameras more than those who don't, which is strange considering the price point and the entry level nature of it.
Having received mine the other day I feel the same way. Just one example: the big, clear LCD is great for manual focus lenses, and the ability to touch a point on the screen and zoom right into it quickly for precise MF is a boon. Of course my 5DIII can do the same in liveview, but I need to move the focus area with the little directional button to the right of the screen. It's actually easier and a lot faster on the M due to the touch screen. But how many people with an M are going to use MF or MF lenses? Not a whole lot, I imagine.
Anyway, big picture I think the M - especially at ~$300 - is perfect for those wanting to supplement their current gear, not replace it. If Canon came out with a FF mirrorless body, about Leica M size, with killer EVF and some small, sharp primes and good little zooms - well, IMO that's a replacement for a DSLR system, not a part of one. I think a lot of people are disappointed in the M because what they're really after is a replacement.
I have been equally impressed with this little camera and can't for the life of me work out why it gets such a bad press.