Review: EOS M System

[mb66energy]

Interface and missing OVF/EVF is a hassle but the IQ is really good.

Thanks for your review, Dustin. It really has confirmed my decision to use the EOS M FOR WHAT IT IS.

I tried to revive my old FD lenses, especially the FD f/1.4 50mm S.S.C. - not as sharp as the Zeiss 1.4/55 but really o.k. I attached an image of a vineyard in Winningen near Koblenz, Germany. Made at f/2.8 and slightly postprocessed, sharpening is 4, Style is Faithful, set blackpoint, contrast +1 with DPP. The second image shows the center strip in full resolution.

The EOS M sensor has a spacial resolution which compares to a 50MPix FF sensor. I always have to keep that in mind if I look at images taken with a 40 yr old lens (!!!).

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Here is one for you with M + 18-55 IS STM - Transfagarasan, Romania:

It's great in terms of sharpness, I have made some contrast adjustments, but the clouds and everything else are real.

Extreme metal festival with M + 22mm? No problem - Alan Averill(Primordial):

AWESOME

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Dustin, thanks much for the thorough review of the EOS M!

I have read just about every M review out there, as well as a lot of forum comments (I tend to get obsessed when considering a significant purchase) and yours was one of the most complete reviews I have seen.

Your photos are beautiful. It was great to see what can be achieved with either the 22 or 18-55 lenses by an accomplished photographer.

At present my sole camera is an S95 which I love but I wanted to complement it with a larger sensor and interchangeable lens camera. I really struggled with whether to go with a comparable DSLR (T3i or 4i) for increased ergonomics and versatility or the M for sake of the portability that I have grown accustomed to with the S95.

I ordered the M and both lenses just this morning and seeing your review this evening made me look forward to trying out the camera even more.

That is a very kind compliment. Thank you. I wouldn't be surprised if you are very pleased with the image quality you get from the M. I think I like the pancake lens better, myself, but have been pleasantly surprised with the 18-55, particularly for landscape.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

In good light the M produces excellent images. In mediocre light it does OK. In poor light, well, let's just say it isn't full frame!

Pretty much all you need to know about the M - in just 3 sentences! ;D

Although there is a noticeable difference in low-light performance with the 22mm vs. the 18-55mm.

True enough, but the f/2 aperture on the 22 might have a small impact on that ;D

Interface and missing OVF/EVF is a hassle but the IQ is really good.

Thanks for your review, Dustin. It really has confirmed my decision to use the EOS M FOR WHAT IT IS.

I tried to revive my old FD lenses, especially the FD f/1.4 50mm S.S.C. - not as sharp as the Zeiss 1.4/55 but really o.k. I attached an image of a vineyard in Winningen near Koblenz, Germany. Made at f/2.8 and slightly postprocessed, sharpening is 4, Style is Faithful, set blackpoint, contrast +1 with DPP. The second image shows the center strip in full resolution.

The EOS M sensor has a spacial resolution which compares to a 50MPix FF sensor. I always have to keep that in mind if I look at images taken with a 40 yr old lens (!!!).

That is a beautiful image. I have been eying some of the FD lenses myself. Not a great fit on the typical EOS system, but a lot of potential on the M for pretty low money. I love my Helios on the M, and I suspect the FD 50 f/1.4 would be a nice fit.

This image is great - great detail, nice color rendition. Well done. You may have just cost me $60 or so

 

[bholliman]

Terrific review Dustin! Very well written from a photographers perspective. I think the pictures you posted with the review and here are a good compliment to the review and personally, I enjoy seeing them.

The M is good purchase for one of two applications, IMO. 1) If you want a light walkaround camera that offers good image quality. 2) As a backup body that your existing lenses will work on with the little adapter. There are arguably better options for #1, but for the combination of #1 and #2 there few competitors.

These two reasons are why I own an EOS-M and am happy with it. There are better options available if you are just looking for an ILC camera and camera system, but for those of us heavily invested in Canon EF lenses, its a great option. I of course prefer shooting with my 6D, but there are times when I don't want to deal with carrying the weight and bulk of a DSLR. The M with the 22/2 lens mounted is easy to take with me when I want to travel light.

Wow, I love my little piece of crap M. I guess it helps that I only paid $299 for it with the 22mm. It is what it is and I like it for that... a tinny camera with a large sensor that I can carry with me and get great shots. Sure it focuses slow and the touch screen drives me nuts but I still love it. It is a fun little camera.

Great shot! It is a fun little camera (for a piece of crap... )

 

[Rienzphotoz]

I gues it was un-professional of me to insult a fellow New Yorker.

So, it would have been okay/professional to insult a fellow who is not from New York? ;D very biased ... just kidding.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I gues it was un-professional of me to insult a fellow New Yorker.

So, it would have been okay/professional to insult a fellow who is not from New York? ;D very biased ... just kidding.

Psssst, don't tell anyone, but I'm actually an American born in California, raised in Arizona, and currently living in Ontario, Canada. I guess that makes me "insultable" ;D

 

[Dylan777]

I always enjoy your PP skill TWI by Dustin Abbott .

With 2 kids (2 &5yrs), I wish I can have some spare times and learn how PP digital images.

 

[surapon]

I have just completed a thorough review of the EOS M and a lot of its components:

http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/09/canon-eos-m-review/

The review includes an examination of the EF - EF-M adapter and EF lenses on the M, the 90EX Speedlite, and the use of multiple adapters for Legacy Lenses like M42 and Konica mounts. The EF-M 22mm f/2 is only native lens included in the review at the moment, but I will be updating it later this week after the EF-M 18-55mm STM lens arrives.

Thousand Thanks, Sir, Dear Dustin.
For Super clear the Ability/ Adaptibility and Usebility of this EOS-M camera from the PRO like you.
Yes, I will wait for MK II ( High End of MK II of EOS-M)
Nice to read your great Website and learn new infor. from your web site.
Surapon

http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/09/canon-eos-m-review/

 

[wickidwombat]

dustin... i'm still waiting for you to write a book on your post processing workflow so i can buy it

nice review BTW much better than my crap attempt when i first got it

 

[wickidwombat]

Sorry if I snarkily insulted you Dustin, I do hope you'll forgive me. I gues it was un-professional of me to insult a fellow New Yorker. I bought my M full original price to shoot video only. My 7D is just fine shooting stills and I'm strong enough to lug it around all day long. The piece of crap M sits on a shelf, lifeless, what a waste of money. The pathetic AF is horrible unless you're shooting a still or slow moving object of considerable size. I even popped my $2500 70-200 white monster on it and it couldn't find the object I pointed it at. My business partner is curious to see how it works with LensBaby lenses. Good luck there.
Keep up the great work man and don't take me seriously, I tend to be critical at times, my bad. Sorry again.

since its sitting on the shelf you should try the ML alpha on it, it really open up its abilities

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I always enjoy your PP skill TWI by Dustin Abbott .

With 2 kids (2 &5yrs), I wish I can have some spare times and learn how PP digital images.

dustin... i'm still waiting for you to write a book on your post processing workflow so i can buy it

nice review BTW much better than my crap attempt when i first got it

Tell you what: in the meantime I will try to find a place to share links to the tutorials I write for various publications. I've got a series of three articles that will go live shortly that I did for Alien Skin.

The downside: when I post those kinds of links I invariably get blasted by some posters here for blatant self promotion. Guess you can't please everyone.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I have just completed a thorough review of the EOS M and a lot of its components:

http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/09/canon-eos-m-review/

The review includes an examination of the EF - EF-M adapter and EF lenses on the M, the 90EX Speedlite, and the use of multiple adapters for Legacy Lenses like M42 and Konica mounts. The EF-M 22mm f/2 is only native lens included in the review at the moment, but I will be updating it later this week after the EF-M 18-55mm STM lens arrives.

Thousand Thanks, Sir, Dear Dustin.
For Super clear the Ability/ Adaptibility and Usebility of this EOS-M camera from the PRO like you.
Yes, I will wait for MK II ( High End of MK II of EOS-M)
Nice to read your great Website and learn new infor. from your web site.
Surapon

http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/09/canon-eos-m-review/

Thanks for the nice feedback, Surapon.

 

[fotorex]

Everything I've read nearly points to this being a replacement for the 650D. (Minus the obvious physical differences and the fact that I can't use EF-S lenses directly)

As a hobbyist/traveller this intrigues me - Is the only real difference I'd be losing is that the EF-M's 11-22 mignt not be as good as the EF-S's 10-22?

I have read nothing but good about the 11-22 so far, but I don't know that I have seen a direct comparison of the two lenses. I just checked if Bryan over at the TDP had added the 11-22 to his chart testing, but that doesn't appear to be the case. The trend with the newer STM lenses is that they are all sharper than the lenses that they are replacing, but, of course, the 11-22 isn't a direct replacement of the 10-22mm.

I personally doubt that you would lose anything (other than a mm of focal length, which could be an issue), and would gain the IS of the 11-22. I would love to see the two lenses compared head to head. I used the 10-22 when I shot crop and found it a very good lens.

Hi,

unfortunately I can´t compare the 11-22 to the 10-22, but I can show you some pictures from the recently golden October days which I have done with the 11-22mm lens:

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Everything I've read nearly points to this being a replacement for the 650D. (Minus the obvious physical differences and the fact that I can't use EF-S lenses directly)

As a hobbyist/traveller this intrigues me - Is the only real difference I'd be losing is that the EF-M's 11-22 mignt not be as good as the EF-S's 10-22?

I have read nothing but good about the 11-22 so far, but I don't know that I have seen a direct comparison of the two lenses. I just checked if Bryan over at the TDP had added the 11-22 to his chart testing, but that doesn't appear to be the case. The trend with the newer STM lenses is that they are all sharper than the lenses that they are replacing, but, of course, the 11-22 isn't a direct replacement of the 10-22mm.

I personally doubt that you would lose anything (other than a mm of focal length, which could be an issue), and would gain the IS of the 11-22. I would love to see the two lenses compared head to head. I used the 10-22 when I shot crop and found it a very good lens.

Hi,

unfortunately I can´t compare the 11-22 to the 10-22, but I can show you some pictures from the recently golden October days which I have done with the 11-22mm lens:

Thank you for sharing, Frank! Those are some excellent shots (I particularly love the tail end of the series) and show both nice detail and color rendition. Would you mind sharing some of your observations on field use and the image quality you are getting?

 

[fotorex]

Hi Dustin,

I´ll try to answer your question as good as poosible. I didn´t take too much pictures until now with the 11-22mm lens.
My above shared pictures are taken in RAW + JPG and the RAW files are postprocessed in LR5 (clarity, contrast, saturation, some are cropped). For the JPG I use the picturestyle Landscape and the results are very similar to my PP RAW Files.
I like very much how well the flares are controlled when the sun is in the frame or in any difficult angle to the lens. Even without a lens hood (I´m still waiting for my order).
Due to the fact that 11mm is UWA, you have to carefully compose your pictures. You shouldn´t place builduings or persons near the edge of the frame as they will be distorted in a unpleasing manner. But I guess this is part of an UWA lens. Also corner sharpness isn´t as good as center sharpness. But I can´t say if this is worse or better than any comparable UWA lens.
Unfortunately ther is no lensprofile in LR5. At least no lensprofile which came from Adobe delivered with LR or any update until know. I haven´t searched for a 3rd party lensprofile on the web yet.
The lens is very similar in weight and dimension compared to the 18-55 and so it is as well balanced with the M. The minimal focussing distance is also good. The picture of the grapes was taken from a very short distance.

Frank

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Hi Dustin,

I´ll try to answer your question as good as poosible. I didn´t take too much pictures until now with the 11-22mm lens.
My above shared pictures are taken in RAW + JPG and the RAW files are postprocessed in LR5 (clarity, contrast, saturation, some are cropped). For the JPG I use the picturestyle Landscape and the results are very similar to my PP RAW Files.
I like very much how well the flares are controlled when the sun is in the frame or in any difficult angle to the lens. Even without a lens hood (I´m still waiting for my order).
Due to the fact that 11mm is UWA, you have to carefully compose your pictures. You shouldn´t place builduings or persons near the edge of the frame as they will be distorted in a unpleasing manner. But I guess this is part of an UWA lens. Also corner sharpness isn´t as good as center sharpness. But I can´t say if this is worse or better than any comparable UWA lens.
Unfortunately ther is no lensprofile in LR5. At least no lensprofile which came from Adobe delivered with LR or any update until know. I haven´t searched for a 3rd party lensprofile on the web yet.
The lens is very similar in weight and dimension compared to the 18-55 and so it is as well balanced with the M. The minimal focussing distance is also good. The picture of the grapes was taken from a very short distance.

Frank

Frank, thanks for the info. No real surprises there. I wouldn't be too concerned about the lens profile as Adobe seems to have been really proactive with the other EF-M lenses in getting official profiles up quickly for them. Everything you said pretty much applies to every Canon wide angle zoom. It would be interesting to see a direct corner comparison to the 10-22, as they are the most natural competitors.

One final thing: I have heard from others that the whole lens retraction/lock is a minor annoyance. How have you found that aspect of the design?

Also, here is another post from the 18-55mm. I have found it's sharpness a rather pleasant surprise. Flare resistance is not fantastic, though.


Transition by Thousand Word Images by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

 

[fotorex]

One final thing: I have heard from others that the whole lens retraction/lock is a minor annoyance. How have you found that aspect of the design?

For me this is no annoyance at all. After using the lens two or three times you get really fast used to that mechanism. I see more the advantage of the design as the lens is quite short when retracted.

Frank

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

One final thing: I have heard from others that the whole lens retraction/lock is a minor annoyance. How have you found that aspect of the design?

For me this is no annoyance at all. After using the lens two or three times you get really fast used to that mechanism. I see more the advantage of the design as the lens is quite short when retracted.

Frank

That's good to hear.

 

[JPAZ]

Kind of an FYI / update. Took my M to see the grandchild this weekend. The IQ was what I expected and I used, at various times, the 22, the 40+adapter and the zoom. Did pretty well with existing light. The "lag" between shots did make photos of an active young child challenging but, in balance, the lightened load of not bringing my big kit was still worth the tradeoff. Maybe next trip I'll bring the big guns......