AF performance on M bodies compared to M3?

[vikingar]

I recently upgraded from an EOS M3 to the R5, mainly because of the EVF and because the M3 AF was just too frustrating, super slow and then just focusing on the background even with the center point. I got some great pictures but also missed lots of shots.

The R5 is awesome, but now I have a bunch of very used EF-M lenses with little resale value sitting around, and I'm thinking of getting a used M body. Doesn't have to have EVF, but faster AF than M3 is a must.

The M6 II is still rather expensive used, so I'm wondering where the sweet spot for older bodies is. How do the AF systems on the other M bodies compare to the M3?

 

[koenkooi]

I recently upgraded from an EOS M3 to the R5, mainly because of the EVF and because the M3 AF was just too frustrating, super slow and then just focusing on the background even with the center point. I got some great pictures but also missed lots of shots.

The R5 is awesome, but now I have a bunch of very used EF-M lenses with little resale value sitting around, and I'm thinking of getting a used M body. Doesn't have to have EVF, but faster AF than M3 is a must.

The M6 II is still rather expensive used, so I'm wondering where the sweet spot for older bodies is. How do the AF systems on the other M bodies compare to the M3?

The M6II has the best AF of all M bodies, by a large margin, it's the only M body that can do eye-AF in servo mode. Having said that, it's not R5 level, it's somewhere between the RP and R.

The AF on the M50 is a huge step down from the M6II, but you can use some workarounds, like selectively enabling continuous AF (which is different from servo-AF!) and bribing your kids to sit still.

This is why I keep hoping for an M300 that has eye-AF in servo mode

 

[SnowMiku]

The AF on the M5 is ok, but sometimes it can focus on the background when trying to focus on flowers (EF-M 18-150mm), I don't have an M3 to compare it to. Last night I was taking photos of the luner eclipse with the M5, 700D and 90D, the M5 couldn't focus on the moon, the 700D focused with the OVF and the 90D focused in live view.

 

[Sporgon]

The “sweet spot”, and best value for money on M series; M5 IMO. Duel pixel AF, much faster than the M3 and cheap as chips now.

 

[pj1974]

I have owned a few M bodies, M, M3, M5, and used a friend's M50mkII.

M5's AF is much better than the M and notably better than the M3

I have also briefly handled the M6mkII in - and it's AF does appear superior to the M5 (and M6 original)

The max aperture of the lens makes a lot of difference in AF too. E.g. the EF-M 22mm f/2 will AF in much darker situations (and quicker in low light) compared to the slower zooms (I have good copies of the 15-45, and 18-150). I tried a Sigma 16mm f/1.4 which seemed to AF really well in low light too.

I also hope that Canon would come out with a M5 mkII... with the AF closer to the latest EOS-RF mount bodies. I love the size and convenience of the EOS-M bodies and lenses.