In the light of the fuss about the new M5 and some implied and direct criticism of the M3, I'd like to report quickly on my experience with the M3.
My wife and I had long planned a hiking trip across Switzerland. We ended up walking 460 km (285 miles) through the Alps over 26 days and this included a cumulative 32,000 m (over 100,000 feet) in altitude gain. A significant criterion for us was to reduce the weight in our backpacks. My photo gear was an important consideration, seeking to optimise weight, flexiblity and image quality.
I sold my 7D, which never really enthused me, except for sport photos (e.g. windsurfing) in bright iight. It also weighed more than my 6D and both were too heavy to take on this trip. So I sold the 7D and bought a M3. Tests quicklly showed that image quality was comparable to that of the 6D, although I lost about a stop in low light and in dynamic range. I could live with this.
I bought a 11-22 mm to complement the 18-55 mm and 55-200 mm that came with the kit. I only took the 11-22 mm and 55-200 mm on the hike, both fitting into a Golla "Mirrorless" camera bag. I also took a Canon 250D close-up lens, three 32GB cards, two spare batteries (and charger) and a Manfrotto pixie tabletop tripod. All up weight 1570g (just under 3 1/2 pounds). This is same weight as just my 6D and 24-105/4 without bag, charger, tripod, spare batteries, yet covered much of the range from 19mm to 320mm (35mm equivalent).
So what was my experience?
* Size does matter - the M3 plus lenses and bag were comfortable over my shoulder and were noticeably less bulky.
* Image quality was completely satisfactory - I'll post some photos soon. For example, I was able to produce a satisfactory Milky Way image at 30 seconds at f?4 and ISO 6400 at 11mm. Sure the 6D with Samyang 14mm would be have been better, but I could not conceive of taking that lens on the hike (weight for one, but focusing a previous version jammed during a Europe trip a year before)
* Focusing for the most part was satisfactory. The M3 and 55-200mm did struggle at the long end, especailly in low light and in low contrast conditions. On the other hand, it was great to have focusing points covering much more of the imaging area. I did wish that focus area was smaller as it could be difficult to focus on fine details.
* I quickly adapted to composing on the screen rather than the optical viewfinder of the 6D. The flip down and up screen was brilliant, especailly for low level and overhead shots. I really missed this when shooting with the 6D a couple of days ago.
* The screen was fine in most situations, but of course washed out in direct sunlight. Holding the Info button boosts screen brightness to maximum, which is a nice touch. Did I miss the electronic viewfinder? On occasion yes, but I would prefer to have a less bulky camera and the ability to slip the viewfinder on and off. Have I bought a finder? Not so far.
* I loved the 11-22mm lens and took most of the photos with it. Signficantly wider than the 24mm on the 6D. Unlocking the collapsed lens became second nature. Sharpness and flare-resistance is great. f/4 at 11mm is okay, but it would be nicer to have a faster lens at 22mm. I may get a 22mm f/2 prime.
* The 55-200mm lens was surprisingly good, even at 200mm. I have some nice photos of ibex and chamois that I cropped from 200mm. Much better than 105mm on the 6D. Macro is mediocre on the 55-200mm so I recommend the 250D close-up lens. I took quite a lot of close-up photos with 22mm at MFD, which gives a nice perspective of mountains behind flowers.
* Battery life was just adequate. A bigger problem was that the battery goes from 2 bars to nothing very quickly. So I ended up always taking a spare battery everywhere I took the camera.
* The camera seems robust enough, but I took care and avoided photos in the rain. Would be nice if the camera and a lens or two would be sealed. But I never had any dust issues and I changed lenses many times each day.
* Frame rate was adequate for the photography I did on the trip and a burst of 5 RAW files was fine. However, the speed of exposure bracketing is simply not satisfactory. 1 fps or so when bracketing is just too slow. I did not lose too many merged photos if the subject was static, but for any movement, this was hopeless. I cannot see why 4 fps is not possible when bracketing. Although dynamic range is much better than on the 7D, it is not as good as on the 6D and I bracketed quite a few difficult photos.
* I missed the GPS built into the 6D. However, I took a Garmin Etrex 20X along and was able to get Lightroom to import GPS data into the image files from the tracklog.
Coming home I took my 6D and 24-105mm f/4 for a stroll along the beach. The weight and bulk of the camera was noticeable. I missed composing using the screen at the back (I never thought I'd admit that) as focusing on the 6D is glacial and the screen does not tilt. It is clear to me that the M3 will be my camera of choice, unless there are particular reasons (e.g. using wide apertures, low light or action). And I've used (d)SLRs since my Canon TLb in the mid-1970s! We just need some fast primes.
My wife and I had long planned a hiking trip across Switzerland. We ended up walking 460 km (285 miles) through the Alps over 26 days and this included a cumulative 32,000 m (over 100,000 feet) in altitude gain. A significant criterion for us was to reduce the weight in our backpacks. My photo gear was an important consideration, seeking to optimise weight, flexiblity and image quality.
I sold my 7D, which never really enthused me, except for sport photos (e.g. windsurfing) in bright iight. It also weighed more than my 6D and both were too heavy to take on this trip. So I sold the 7D and bought a M3. Tests quicklly showed that image quality was comparable to that of the 6D, although I lost about a stop in low light and in dynamic range. I could live with this.
I bought a 11-22 mm to complement the 18-55 mm and 55-200 mm that came with the kit. I only took the 11-22 mm and 55-200 mm on the hike, both fitting into a Golla "Mirrorless" camera bag. I also took a Canon 250D close-up lens, three 32GB cards, two spare batteries (and charger) and a Manfrotto pixie tabletop tripod. All up weight 1570g (just under 3 1/2 pounds). This is same weight as just my 6D and 24-105/4 without bag, charger, tripod, spare batteries, yet covered much of the range from 19mm to 320mm (35mm equivalent).
So what was my experience?
* Size does matter - the M3 plus lenses and bag were comfortable over my shoulder and were noticeably less bulky.
* Image quality was completely satisfactory - I'll post some photos soon. For example, I was able to produce a satisfactory Milky Way image at 30 seconds at f?4 and ISO 6400 at 11mm. Sure the 6D with Samyang 14mm would be have been better, but I could not conceive of taking that lens on the hike (weight for one, but focusing a previous version jammed during a Europe trip a year before)
* Focusing for the most part was satisfactory. The M3 and 55-200mm did struggle at the long end, especailly in low light and in low contrast conditions. On the other hand, it was great to have focusing points covering much more of the imaging area. I did wish that focus area was smaller as it could be difficult to focus on fine details.
* I quickly adapted to composing on the screen rather than the optical viewfinder of the 6D. The flip down and up screen was brilliant, especailly for low level and overhead shots. I really missed this when shooting with the 6D a couple of days ago.
* The screen was fine in most situations, but of course washed out in direct sunlight. Holding the Info button boosts screen brightness to maximum, which is a nice touch. Did I miss the electronic viewfinder? On occasion yes, but I would prefer to have a less bulky camera and the ability to slip the viewfinder on and off. Have I bought a finder? Not so far.
* I loved the 11-22mm lens and took most of the photos with it. Signficantly wider than the 24mm on the 6D. Unlocking the collapsed lens became second nature. Sharpness and flare-resistance is great. f/4 at 11mm is okay, but it would be nicer to have a faster lens at 22mm. I may get a 22mm f/2 prime.
* The 55-200mm lens was surprisingly good, even at 200mm. I have some nice photos of ibex and chamois that I cropped from 200mm. Much better than 105mm on the 6D. Macro is mediocre on the 55-200mm so I recommend the 250D close-up lens. I took quite a lot of close-up photos with 22mm at MFD, which gives a nice perspective of mountains behind flowers.
* Battery life was just adequate. A bigger problem was that the battery goes from 2 bars to nothing very quickly. So I ended up always taking a spare battery everywhere I took the camera.
* The camera seems robust enough, but I took care and avoided photos in the rain. Would be nice if the camera and a lens or two would be sealed. But I never had any dust issues and I changed lenses many times each day.
* Frame rate was adequate for the photography I did on the trip and a burst of 5 RAW files was fine. However, the speed of exposure bracketing is simply not satisfactory. 1 fps or so when bracketing is just too slow. I did not lose too many merged photos if the subject was static, but for any movement, this was hopeless. I cannot see why 4 fps is not possible when bracketing. Although dynamic range is much better than on the 7D, it is not as good as on the 6D and I bracketed quite a few difficult photos.
* I missed the GPS built into the 6D. However, I took a Garmin Etrex 20X along and was able to get Lightroom to import GPS data into the image files from the tracklog.
Coming home I took my 6D and 24-105mm f/4 for a stroll along the beach. The weight and bulk of the camera was noticeable. I missed composing using the screen at the back (I never thought I'd admit that) as focusing on the 6D is glacial and the screen does not tilt. It is clear to me that the M3 will be my camera of choice, unless there are particular reasons (e.g. using wide apertures, low light or action). And I've used (d)SLRs since my Canon TLb in the mid-1970s! We just need some fast primes.
Now I just take the body and kit lens and shoot a gig. Ha.
