Has annyone had a chance to try it? I am looking to replace my lumix lx3, and a small body that would allow me to use my canon lenses, makes a lot of sense to me. I know I still need an adapter, but so do all other mirrorless.Canon M2 offers no real advantages over the original M. Or you expect for a hypothetical M with dual pixel AF sensor, or changes to G1X Mark ii, or even Sl1.
What I am trying to figure is, would it be worth to get a the new M2 versus the M, or just wait till they release an US/rest of the world upgrade?
August 01, 2014, 11:02:01 PM
Pages: [1] 2
Topic: Canon EOS M2 (Read 3608 times)
ajfotofilmagem
- 1D Mark IV
- Posts: 837
-
« Last Edit: February 14, 2014, 02:17:27 PM by ajfotofilmagem »
Logged
neuroanatomist
- CR GEEK
-
- Posts: 13626
-
What I am trying to figure is, would it be worth to get a the new M2 versus the M
The only real differences are that the M2 has WiFi and the 18 MP APS-C sensor in the M2 is the one from the SL1 with Hybrid CMOS II, vs. the T4i's regular Hybrid CMOS (the II version has phase AF detectors over ~80% of the frame, vs. just in the middle).
Logged
NWPhil
- EOS M2
- Posts: 172
- one eye; one shot - multiple misses
-
Thanks guys.
I have to rent it and see if indeed I like it or not.
I have to rent it and see if indeed I like it or not.
Logged
Canon shooter, but anything goes as ammunition (L, non L, Zeiss, Leica, Rokinon,Sigma)
wdduggy
- SX50 HS
- Posts: 1
-
I have one. I ordered body only from a Japanese seller on eBay. The main difference is that focus speed is significantly faster (even compared to the EOS-M with the firmware upgrade). IQ is about the same. It was $699 body only, which is SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive than the EOS-M with lenses here in the U.S. I think you would need to have a specific reason for upgrading due to the price. Mine was as a backup to my primary camera for photographing moving subjects. I'm flying and everything has to go on the carry-on, so the space savings of the EOS-M2 as a backup camera body were worth it to me.
Logged
surapon
- Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
-
- Posts: 2152
- 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
-
Did the EOS M2 actually get released? I just did a quick search and found almost nothing about it that wasn't written back in December when it was announced. I like my M, don't love it, but I do like it. Based on what specs were released it didn't seem like that much of an upgrade, but was interested in what people were saying about it..but there doesn't seem to be anything written about it.
Thoughts?
Dear Friend overniven.
Here is the Link :
http://thenewcamera.com/tag/canon-eos-m2/
Enjoy.
Surapon
Logged
bauerman
- Power Shot G16
- Posts: 23
-
They are starting to pop up here stateside - I just saw an M2 kit available for sale on another photo forum - $650 with the kit lens included.
Logged
daemorhedron
- Power Shot G16
- Posts: 37
-
I own both the M and the M2, and will be posting a review/comparison soon.
Logged
daemorhedron
- Power Shot G16
- Posts: 37
-
Ok still compiling details/review (sorry, super busy) but to give you the short version:
1. The critical question of AF....it's undoubtedly better but far from perfect. I can guarantee you that any AF annoyance you had with the M will carry on with the M2. You won't stop swearing by upgrading, but you will definitely do less of it. It's worth mentioning that I don't think the AF on the M is as anywhere near as bad as people claim.
2. It supports Wifi, but in such a way that is certainly disappointing. For wireless tethering, I would rate the experience somewhat on par with the Sony A7. It works, but nothing thrilling. It still does not support wired tethering which would help dispel majority of my angsty angst feelings against Canon for crippling these amazing creatures.
3. It's even smaller and lighter. The grip is a smidge different. Definitely improved.
4. Takes the exact same battery. My 3rd party Opteka batteries worked fine in it (as with the EOS M).
5. It uses different firmware. Version I had was 1.0.2 for the M2. This means you cannot currently run Tragic Lantern or Magic Lantern, which imo basically ends the decision making process right there. I find focus peaking in particular to be of critical benefit with EOS M.
6. Noise seems immeasurably better. I tested up to 12800 and frankly it's quite lovely and very usable compared to the original M.
So overall, is it worth your money? As always it's up to you. At the time of this writing you can get at least the EOS M and a lens for $300, whereas the M2 body alone is about $650. I would say:
-if you do NOT have an M, and you absolutely do not care about Tragic Lantern then absolutely
-if you already have an M, then I would say don't bother
-if you don't know which to get, get the M
There is no doubt in my mind that BOTH cameras have an undeserved bad reputation. If you're on a budget (or just cheap like me) I promise you that the M is BAR NONE the best way to get started in photography.
Happy shooting! =)
1. The critical question of AF....it's undoubtedly better but far from perfect. I can guarantee you that any AF annoyance you had with the M will carry on with the M2. You won't stop swearing by upgrading, but you will definitely do less of it. It's worth mentioning that I don't think the AF on the M is as anywhere near as bad as people claim.
2. It supports Wifi, but in such a way that is certainly disappointing. For wireless tethering, I would rate the experience somewhat on par with the Sony A7. It works, but nothing thrilling. It still does not support wired tethering which would help dispel majority of my angsty angst feelings against Canon for crippling these amazing creatures.
3. It's even smaller and lighter. The grip is a smidge different. Definitely improved.
4. Takes the exact same battery. My 3rd party Opteka batteries worked fine in it (as with the EOS M).
5. It uses different firmware. Version I had was 1.0.2 for the M2. This means you cannot currently run Tragic Lantern or Magic Lantern, which imo basically ends the decision making process right there. I find focus peaking in particular to be of critical benefit with EOS M.
6. Noise seems immeasurably better. I tested up to 12800 and frankly it's quite lovely and very usable compared to the original M.
So overall, is it worth your money? As always it's up to you. At the time of this writing you can get at least the EOS M and a lens for $300, whereas the M2 body alone is about $650. I would say:
-if you do NOT have an M, and you absolutely do not care about Tragic Lantern then absolutely
-if you already have an M, then I would say don't bother
-if you don't know which to get, get the M
There is no doubt in my mind that BOTH cameras have an undeserved bad reputation. If you're on a budget (or just cheap like me) I promise you that the M is BAR NONE the best way to get started in photography.
Happy shooting! =)
Logged
Pages: [1] 2