Review: Canon EOS M3

[GMCPhotographics]

<p>For the parts of the planet that actually get the opportunity to buy the brand new Canon EOS M3, this is a worthwhile read. For the rest of us, we’re going to have to decide if we want to buy a “grey market” M3.</p>
<p>Dan Berdal of DnK Photography has done a very “real world” review of the little camera and compared it to his workhorse, the EOS 5D Mark III.</p>
<blockquote><p>Mirrorless cameras are the future of photography. At some point the bulk of a camera like the 5dmkiii + high end lens makes you a worse photographer. If you’re serious about photography, but your current camera is so big that you don’t use it, then this is a great option. Personally I think that this camera will be a great walk around camera. The image quality is more than sufficient for capturing life memories and travel shots.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.dnkphotography.com/blog/wedding-photographers/hands-on-with-the-canon-eos-m3/" target="_blank">Read the full review</a></p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.dnkphotography.com/" target="_blank">DnK</a>] via [<a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/mirrorless.html" target="_blank">NL</a>]</p>

I agree with the part highlighted in red here, but really it has nothing to do with mirrorless vs dslrs. Many dslrs and 'high end lenses' are much bigger than they need to be, especially in shorter focal lengths. Larger size is often an advantage, but for the vast majority of the time it isn't, yet the fashion now seems to be for large dslr bodies and even larger lenses.

I attach a picture of the old Takumar 55mm f/1.8 - certainly a 'high end lens', yet look at the size of it ! 49mm filter thread. Likewise the lens beside the camera is a 135mm ! But a real telephoto; its length measures 85mm, whereas nowadays many 'telephoto' lenses are not telephoto at all.

The large size today is the fashion, nothing more. Given the way dslr sales compare with mirrorless it would suggest that people spending many bucks on a camera today still want some size for their money.

At what point is someone invested or easily disinterested in their craft? A little drizzle or cumbersome gear puts someone off taking photos in the best light...so how does some one expect to push their art and craft with THAT kind of attitude. Maybe they should stick to selfies on their iphones?

I chose a 5DIII because it's the best camera for what I want to do...expand and broaden my photographic skills and abilities. I chose a 400mm f2.8 LIS because it's the best and most versatile of the big while telephoto lenses. If photographic equipment is too inconvenient...then I suggest staying at home and watching TV as a better hobby.

 

[JoFT]

Mirrorless is the future: Everybody who thinks he can lough should wait: This sentence is going to become true. I am 200% convinced.

The reason is pretty simple: costs and performance:

• Whenever a mirror has to move: this costs time and shakes the camera. no mirror, no shake
• A mirror is a mechanical device which costs money
• [font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]It is not only the size of the body which will get reduced but the lenses itself as well. The smaller distance between sensor and bayonet flange allows the lens designers to perform totally new lens designs which huge advantages.[/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Whoever does not believe: I use both: EOS 5D3 and 7D2 as well as µ43. All with pretty good lenses. The µ43 prime lenses are mind-blowing good!!! and very compact. [/font]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The situation that there is no high end glas like the ZEISS OTUS lens comparable designed for mirrorless full frame cameras has only one reason: there is no Canon or Nikon FF mirrorless camera there... This will come as soon as bot will join the market with mirrorless full frames...[/font]

 

[Lee Jay]

• Mirrorless is the future: Everybody who thinks he can lough should wait: This sentence is going to become true. I am 200% convinced.

  Then you might want to take some math classes.
  

  The reason is pretty simple: costs and performance:
  
  

  • Whenever a mirror has to move: this costs time and shakes the camera. no mirror, no shake
  • A mirror is a mechanical device which costs money

  
  And a microdisplay is an electronic device which is free?
  
  In reality, good microdisplays cost *more* than mirrors and prisms.
  
  

  • [font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]It is not only the size of the body which will get reduced but the lenses itself as well. The smaller distance between sensor and bayonet flange allows the lens designers to perform totally new lens designs which huge advantages.[/font]

  
  Only for wide-angle lenses, which tend to be the smallest lenses in the kit anyway.

 

[Lee Jay]

I agree with the part highlighted in red here, but really it has nothing to do with mirrorless vs dslrs. Many dslrs and 'high end lenses' are much bigger than they need to be, especially in shorter focal lengths. Larger size is often an advantage, but for the vast majority of the time it isn't, yet the fashion now seems to be for large dslr bodies and even larger lenses.

Fashion? You didn't really mean that did you?

I attach a picture of the old Takumar 55mm f/1.8 - certainly a 'high end lens', yet look at the size of it ! 49mm filter thread. Likewise the lens beside the camera is a 135mm ! But a real telephoto; its length measures 85mm, whereas nowadays many 'telephoto' lenses are not telephoto at all.

How's the stabilization and autofocus performance on those two?

It's trivially true that adding stabilization and AF will increase the size of a lens. It's equally trivial that a zoom lens is larger than a prime of comparable focal length and speed. For most of us, all three are more than worthy of the size increase. I won't buy a prime over a zoom unless it offers a focal length I can't get in a zoom (i.e. my 15mm f/2.8 fisheye and my 2000mm f/7), or a speed I can't get in a zoom (i.e. my 35/1.4 and 85/1.8 ). I value stabilization and AF performance a lot because most of what I shoot is not compatible with a tripod or with manual focus.

It's also trivially true that virtually all Canon telephoto lenses are true telephoto lenses.

The 85/1.8 is 71.5mm long
The 100/2 is 73.5mm long
The 135/2L is 112mm long
The 200/2.8 is 135.2mm long
The 300/2.8 is 248mm long
The 400/5.6 is 256.5mm long
The 400/2.8 is 343mm long
The 600/4 is 448mm long
The 800/5.6 is 461mm long

Even the zooms:
The 70-200/2.8 is 199mm long
The 70-300L is 143mm long
The 100-400 is 193mm long
The 200-400 is 366mm long

So quit making stuff up like, "nowadays many 'telephoto' lenses are not telephoto at all."

The large size today is the fashion, nothing more.

You really did mean "fashion", didn't you! Wow. I care less about "fashion" than anyone I've ever met, and probably less than anyone you've ever met as well. I choose nothing based on how it looks. Nothing. I don't care that I've basically worn the same clothes for the last 35 years, or that my chosen camera bag makes me look like I'm a pregnant middle-aged man. I didn't choose my 2004 Prius because it was the best looking car on the lot, and I don't choose to use SLRs for their "fashion" either.

I choose them for the same reasons I choose the gloves I wear - they fit my hands and serve a particular purpose or set of purposes.

 

[Zv]

What makes you a worse photographer is making excuses about gear and not going out and shooting. Big or small doesn't matter. There are cameras of all sizes to accommodate everyone's needs.

I've never heard anyone say thier 5D MkIII is holding them back, because of it's size. It's not a wardrobe or a fridge. Put it in a bag and be done with it. You need a bag for a mirroless camera too, they don't just float in the air beside you!

Edit - or do they?

 

[grainier]

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]It is not only the size of the body which will get reduced but the lenses itself as well. The smaller distance between sensor and bayonet flange allows the lens designers to perform totally new lens designs which huge advantages.[/font]

It not the bayonet flange, it's vastly reduced image circle. Consider Sony full frame E-mount lenses that directly match Canon - 70-200/4 OSS is bigger and heavier than 70-200/4 L IS. Vario-Tessar 16-35 is just a bit smaller and lighter than 16-35/4L, Vario-Tessar 24-70/4 is quite a bit smaller than matching Canon, but 24-70/4 L has additional functionality.

 

[fragilesi]

You really did mean "fashion", didn't you! Wow. I care less about "fashion" than anyone I've ever met, and probably less than anyone you've ever met as well. I choose nothing based on how it looks. Nothing. I don't care that I've basically worn the same clothes for the last 35 years, or that my chosen camera bag makes me look like I'm a pregnant middle-aged man. I didn't choose my 2004 Prius because it was the best looking car on the lot, and I don't choose to use SLRs for their "fashion" either.

I choose them for the same reasons I choose the gloves I wear - they fit my hands and serve a particular purpose or set of purposes.

You do realise that if anyone from Apple reads this there will likely be a trained assassin dispatched to deal with you within a day Choosing things because they serve a purpose, wherever did you come up with such strange notions????

 

[Lee Jay]

You really did mean "fashion", didn't you! Wow. I care less about "fashion" than anyone I've ever met, and probably less than anyone you've ever met as well. I choose nothing based on how it looks. Nothing. I don't care that I've basically worn the same clothes for the last 35 years, or that my chosen camera bag makes me look like I'm a pregnant middle-aged man. I didn't choose my 2004 Prius because it was the best looking car on the lot, and I don't choose to use SLRs for their "fashion" either.

I choose them for the same reasons I choose the gloves I wear - they fit my hands and serve a particular purpose or set of purposes.

You do realise that if anyone from Apple reads this there will likely be a trained assassin dispatched to deal with you within a day Choosing things because they serve a purpose, wherever did you come up with such strange notions????

Yeah...Applebots are strange. I've never owned one of their products, and I likely never will. Pretty much everything they stand for is something I oppose.

 

[fragilesi]

You really did mean "fashion", didn't you! Wow. I care less about "fashion" than anyone I've ever met, and probably less than anyone you've ever met as well. I choose nothing based on how it looks. Nothing. I don't care that I've basically worn the same clothes for the last 35 years, or that my chosen camera bag makes me look like I'm a pregnant middle-aged man. I didn't choose my 2004 Prius because it was the best looking car on the lot, and I don't choose to use SLRs for their "fashion" either.

I choose them for the same reasons I choose the gloves I wear - they fit my hands and serve a particular purpose or set of purposes.

You do realise that if anyone from Apple reads this there will likely be a trained assassin dispatched to deal with you within a day Choosing things because they serve a purpose, wherever did you come up with such strange notions????

Yeah...Applebots are strange. I've never owned one of their products, and I likely never will. Pretty much everything they stand for is something I oppose.

Well I'll confess I bought an iPhone (3GS), really liked it, still use it now. But having now played with an Android phone I'll soon be getting rid of even that. To be fair what they do, they do well, but I shake my head in wonder at the amount of products Apple manage to sell to some of my colleagues and how convinced said colleagues are the benefits of the newer models. Me, I'll be getting a cheap Moto G and save enough for a decent lens .

 

[Adelino]

From reading the comments I have decided what is needed is a camera that folds to pocket size but unfolds to the size of a 5d with grip, has the heft and build quality of the 7dII but has anti gravity boosters so that it is light as an iphone and the 16-400 f2.0 lens collapses like one of those pop up camping cups. Until that happens I am sure engineers will be working to make things lighter, faster, stronger, and more compact. I do see mirrors going away (or at least becoming more of a niche market, maybe some day they will be leading the retro camera designs) but they will probably be very prominent and relevant for at least a decade.

 

[Lee Jay]

I do see mirrors going away (or at least becoming more of a niche market, maybe some day they will be leading the retro camera designs) but they will probably be very prominent and relevant for at least a decade.

SLRs have *always* been a niche product, even in the film days. Compacts with external non-TTL optical finders and other sorts of lower-end cameras were always far more popular than SLRs.

 

[epocalibera]

Re: Review: Canon EOS M3 - Low Light High ISO Movie Samples

I have just uploaded a compilation of movie samples shot in low light - high ISO, with the EOS M3 in Athens, Greece. ISO value of every movie sample is shown at the right-bottom side of the video. Chipped and unchipped legacy lenses were used for shooting the samples of this movie, which are:
1. Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 non-Ai (adapter used).
2. Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4 (23A).
3. Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124AF Pro DX II for Nikon (adapter used).
4. Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF for Canon.
Movie samples were shot from April 11 until April 15 2015 in the center of the Greek capital.
Hope it helps some people.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_MiVFmAg_o

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Re: Review: Canon EOS M3 - Low Light High ISO Movie Samples

I have just uploaded a compilation of movie samples shot in low light - high ISO, with the EOS M3 in Athens, Greece. ISO value of every movie sample is shown at the right-bottom side of the video. Chipped and unchipped legacy lenses were used for shooting the samples of this movie, which are:
1. Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 non-Ai (adapter used).
2. Mir 24N 35mm f2 (adapter used).
3. Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124AF Pro DX II for Nikon (adapter used).
4. Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF for Canon.
Movie samples were shot from April 11 until April 15 2015 in the center of the Greek capital.
Hope it helps some people.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_MiVFmAg_o

Thank you for contributing to this discussion.
And welcome to Canonrumors.

 

[jonathan7007]

I will read the thread because there is usually a good discussion. However here I just jump in to write that I couldn't wait for Canon to make something small and good for street, people work, events with less structured expectations.... I bought a Fuji x100T in November the minute they started shipping and just took delivery of a Fuji X-E2 so I could add access to a couple more focal lengths of the excellent (and small) Fujinon lenses. (a little 18mm f2 and the wonderful so far 35mm f1.4 native, not equivalent...)

Back in the day I did a lot of B&W personal work on a Leica M2. This form factor and the x100T optical viewfinder seem like coming home to that. My wife already has less negative to say when we head out the door and I have the x100T. Before I might grab a 5DMk3 and a 24 or my Sigma 35 Art and the reaction was, "You're going to take THAT?" She was channeling some people's reaction to a giant piece of gear and big "eye" of glass. It helps for her (and me) that the x100T is silent in a room full of people.

The Fujis look more like a point-and-shoots and they keep people way more relaxed.

Canons still required for my pro work, tilt-and-shift lenses, bigger files for print, etc. But I grin from ear to ear sometimes when working with the Fujis. I take a camera with me every day. This is fun! ..and the files are still exciting to work with.

I am one "vote" in a big change and yes, I read the sales figure charts. I am glad I am not a camera maker employees now (was, once, and in sales!)

 

[Lee Jay]

Before I might grab a 5DMk3 and a 24 or my Sigma 35 Art and the reaction was, "You're going to take THAT?"

That would be grounds for divorce for me.

 

[epocalibera]

Re: Review: Canon EOS M3 - Low Light High ISO Movie Samples

I have just uploaded a compilation of movie samples shot in low light - high ISO, with the EOS M3 in Athens, Greece. ISO value of every movie sample is shown at the right-bottom side of the video. Chipped and unchipped legacy lenses were used for shooting the samples of this movie, which are:
1. Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 non-Ai (adapter used).
2. Mir 24N 35mm f2 (adapter used). Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4 (23A)
3. Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124AF Pro DX II for Nikon (adapter used).
4. Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF for Canon.
Movie samples were shot from April 11 until April 15 2015 in the center of the Greek capital.
Hope it helps some people.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_MiVFmAg_o

Thank you for contributing to this discussion.
And welcome to Canonrumors.

Thank you ajfotofilmagem, until today i was only a reader, so now I have joined.

I have also corrected my previous message because finally the movie clips shot with the "Mir 24N 35mm f2" lens were not included in this video.
So I deleted this lens from my message and added the lens that I had forgotten before:
Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4 (23A)
With this lens I have shot the initial clips of my video and it is important to note.

 

[dcm]

M3+EVF arrived today. Used my M quite a bit, 7K+ images, and have the full lens kit so I'm pretty familiar and comfortable with it. My expectation was an M+some improvements so I focused on a few things were I hoped it would be better. Initial impressions of the M3 are favorable, but wasn't able to do much due to the weather - mostly testing ergonomics and my intended use cases. It does solve several of my gripes about the original M. Still a lot of testing do but no disappointments so far.

Not looking at images yet due to poor lighting. LR, DxO, and Photos don't have support for the CR2s. Hope it comes with the T6s/T6i update that will also be required. Guess its back to Canon software for now.

Slightly bulkier than the M, but in a good way. The new grip provides a much better handhold. I am more comfortable with an EF lens attached. And it seems nicer when hold the camera with EF-M lenses mounted.

AF seems better than the M although I didn't do any side by side comparisons. It focused my EF-M and several EF lenses quickly with no hunting (unless I was inside MFD . Still have a lot more testing to do here but nothing negative to report so far.

Focus peaking (FP) is a nice addition, particularly for manual glass like my old FD lenses. I tried the FDn 50/1.8 with the Fotasy FD adapter and it worked great. Takes me back to my film days. I also tried it with EF 85 f/1.8 in MF mode and FP worked well, just a bit more challenging with a lens designed for AF. The Tamron 150-600 doesn't seem to register as an AF lens (expected) so I used FP with it as well. Will have to send the Tamron in for an update when they have an AF fix.

I like the EVF, particularly for longer focal lengths. Tested with EF-M 55-200, EF 85 f/1.8, EF 100-400 II (w Ext 2.0 III), and Tamron 150-600. Yep, I was handholding the M3+EVF+Adapter+Ext2.0+100-400II and it was usable at an effective 1280mm. Can't wait for a clear night to shoot the moon. Much better than holding at arm's length to compose and you can zoom the EVF to 5x or 10x. FP is still pretty good at 5X, but get's faint at 10x. EVF might not be quite as good as my 6D OVF but better than any P&S OVF that I remember. I think it will be good enough for me. I'd have no hesitation handholding a long lens on the M3 with the EVF. And it tilts, no angle finder needed!

The wheel around the shutter button is a nice addition. Great for adjustments when using the EVF. You don't have to take the camera away from your face to make a change. Still deciding how to setup the buttons, but there are plenty of choices for such a small camera.

Don't think I'll ever use the tilt screen for selfies, but it was nice to hold the camera waist level like an old Yashica TLR I used many moons ago. I can see this will be real useful for shooting the grandkid without having to squat or kneel to shoot at her level. I can see this as also being helpful when mounted on a tripod or gimbal. Haven't given the WiFi tethering a shot yet.

So far it appears to be a solid improvement over the original M.

 

[casperl]

Statements like this always make me laugh: "Mirrorless cameras are the future of photography"

I laugh because mirrorless cameras are selling on a yearly decline, faster than DSLR sales are declining.
I personally think (notice what I did there, instead of making a stupid global statement, I made a personal opinion) that there will always be a market for mirrorless cameras. But I don't think it will grow any bigger or become the only market in cameras. There will always be a market for people who won't compromise quality and depth of field for portability. For me, I use full frame and have done for many years in both a personal and professional context. I see nothing in the mirrorless format which attracts me. I like my 400mm f2.8 LIS, my 85L and 35L's. I appreciate what they offer me as a photographer, regardless of how heavy they are.

That statement is pretty much a personal opinion. You don't need to state "I personally think" explicitly to make it one.

 

[gregory4000]

I like mirrors. I also like DSLR. Each have their place. But the EVF will offer abilities that an optical viewfinder will soon fall short on. Maybe not now, but in the near future. It will see better in the dark, much better focus assist, true color accuracy, contrast. Again, maybe not now, but in the near future. Don't forget true silent shutter, 20, 30, 60 stills a second, No shutter ware.
DSLR are great. Just like driving a muscle car. But technology always wins. Just need a little vision.

 

[gregory4000]

I like mirrorless. I also like DSLR. Each have their place. But the EVF will offer abilities that an optical viewfinder will soon fall short on. Maybe not now, but in the near future. It will see better in the dark, much better focus assist, true color accuracy, contrast. Again, maybe not now, but in the near future. Don't forget true silent shutter, 20, 30, 60 stills a second, No shutter ware.
DSLR are great. Just like driving a muscle car. But technology always wins. Just need a little vision.
Modify message

Correction-on above post. Mirrorless