Canon EOS M5 Review from Dustin

[NorbR]

I'm actually ditching the 40mm f/2.8 STM for a Voigtländer 40mm f/2 since the Canon doesn't seem to like DPAF (on any of my DPAF cameras).

I saw a similar point in your review, and I was a bit surprised. What exactly is wrong with the Canon 40mm in your experience?

I find that it works quite well on my M5. Sure, the focus is slow, but not unusably so. And more important, it is decisive (no hunting), and accurate. Not for use on anything that moves too fast, but otherwise perfectly appropriate. I don't see a big difference in performance between the 40mm and the 50mm STM. I use the latter much more frequently juste because I prefer the focal length, but performance wise I would be happy with both.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I'm actually ditching the 40mm f/2.8 STM for a Voigtländer 40mm f/2 since the Canon doesn't seem to like DPAF (on any of my DPAF cameras).

I saw a similar point in your review, and I was a bit surprised. What exactly is wrong with the Canon 40mm in your experience?

I find that it works quite well on my M5. Sure, the focus is slow, but not unusably so. And more important, it is decisive (no hunting), and accurate. Not for use on anything that moves too fast, but otherwise perfectly appropriate. I don't see a big difference in performance between the 40mm and the 50mm STM. I use the latter much more frequently juste because I prefer the focal length, but performance wise I would be happy with both.

Interesting, as I find the 40 STM to be considerably slower than the 50mm STM. I've also used it some recently on an 80D on a motorized gimbal for video work, and ended up switching to the 24mm STM lens because the 40 STM was both slow to make focus transitions and also much louder in operation.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

If the M5 was based on DSLR firmware and features, that would go a long way toward convincing me to buy one. I get the impression that it is based on Powershot firmware. That is OK, but not at the price they are asking.

I suppose better firmware means faster processor means bigger battery, bigger camera, and so on.

I keep hoping to stop at my local camera store to see if its something I'd upgrade to from my 1GX II.

 

[bholliman]

If the M5 was based on DSLR firmware and features, that would go a long way toward convincing me to buy one. I get the impression that it is based on Powershot firmware. That is OK, but not at the price they are asking.

I suppose better firmware means faster processor means bigger battery, bigger camera, and so on.

I keep hoping to stop at my local camera store to see if its something I'd upgrade to from my 1GX II.

The PowerShot vs. DSLR firmware discussion has been bouncing around for a while. I'm not sure how you can tell... The M5 menus are very complete and well laid out from my perspective (I'm an experienced 6D/5D3/5DsR user) and the cameras performance is very good. It's auto focus is fast, accurate and responsive, not up to 5D3/s standards, but good enough for most general purpose shooting.

 

[NorbR]

Interesting, as I find the 40 STM to be considerably slower than the 50mm STM. I've also used it some recently on an 80D on a motorized gimbal for video work, and ended up switching to the 24mm STM lens because the 40 STM was both slow to make focus transitions and also much louder in operation.

Well that's definitely interesting. Now that I'm back home I just gave it another try. I had admittedly never tried the 24mm STM, since I have no intention of using it on the M5, having the EF-M 22mm already. But I gave it a try here.

In a nutshell:

• there is definitely no significant difference for me in focusing speed between the 40mm STM and the 50mm STM. If anything, I would say that the 40mm is a hair faster. But again, nothing significant.
• the 24mm STM is the fastest of the lot, but the difference is not night and day.
• the 40mm STM is indeed louder (I usually don't pay too much attention to that, since I don't do video).

Overall, as I mentioned, I find the 40mm to be rather well suited to the M5, just as much as the 50mm. At least in terms of focusing speed, I see no difference.

 

[slclick]

I've seen the L bracket from RRS and it's very nice but lacking one feature I need for all my bodies...a slot for a handstrap. Kirk has no plans for an M5 plate, L or not. I hope that will change as they usually include a slot on their plates.
Anyone know of an L plate or even a bottom plate that is a match for the M5 with a slot?

Thanks

 

[KeithBreazeal]

Just got back from a trip to the Columbia State Historical Park in California, an old Gold mining town.
I only took the M5 and two lenses- 15-45mm & 11-22mm. It was nice to walk around all day without feeling the pain of the big bodies.
I was fairly pleased with the results. The 5D IV could have done much better in the low light interiors, but not too bad for the little APSC guy.

Columbia the Blacksmith 0494 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

Columbia Livery & Feed 0473 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

Columbia The Big Safe 0452 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

Columbia interior 0394 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

Columbia interior 0386 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

Columbia Fire House 0413 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr