I can't really say I'm a fan either. I've played around a little bit with the M but I definitely didn't have and "EOSM". The IQ seems very good but it's like shooting live view with a T3i... Slowwwww. Canon needs to release a new camera with vastly improved AF and a nice hi-res evf. If they release that and a few new compact, wide aperture primes, they'll have a competitive system.
I have to say that the nicest mirrorless camera I've played around with thus far is the NEX7, although I can't seem to get used to that camera's menus and controls.
Yeah, I much preferred the 5n to the nex 7. I don't need or want an evf in a small mirrorless body. If Sony could get their UI and menus right, the NEX would be pretty awesome. I will say, however, that Canon's ef-m lenses show great promise- easily better than the kit Sony lenses.
The EOS M + 22mm/F2 kit w/free shipping is on sale on sale at Newegg for $549.99. You have to add the kit to your shopping cart and then go to the checkout page before it will show you the $549.99 price.
The EOS M + 22mm/F2 kit w/free shipping is on sale on sale at Newegg for $549.99. You have to add the kit to your shopping cart and then go to the checkout page before it will show you the $549.99 price.
Interesting. The price collapse of the exorbitantly priced and feebly featured EOS M (my opinion of the EOS M relative to similarly priced competitive mirrorless models, or embarrassingly, lower priced mirrorless models) happened faster than I suspected. It must be selling very poorly.
I've been wanting a mirrorless that would be able to share my EF lenses and still AF. Being last to the party, I figured Canon would be able to see everybody else's mistakes and do better. I wanted to like the EOS M, but found it ridiculous to pay 800 for arguably the 5th best mirrorless body that would AF using EF lenses.
longisland.km wrote:
Interesting. The price collapse of the exorbitantly priced and feebly featured EOS M (my opinion of the EOS M relative to similarly priced competitive mirrorless models, or embarrassingly, lower priced mirrorless models) happened faster than I suspected. It must be selling very poorly.
I've been wanting a mirrorless that would be able to share my EF lenses and still AF. Being last to the party, I figured Canon would be able to see everybody else's mistakes and do better. I wanted to like the EOS M, but found it ridiculous to pay 800 for arguably the 5th best mirrorless body that would AF using EF lenses. ...Show more →
What feeble features? Its a 650d in a mini box. Yes the AF isnt the best but thats its only real issue.
RobDickinson wrote:
What feeble features? Its a 650d in a mini box. Yes the AF isnt the best but thats its only real issue.
Hi Rob,
First, let me state that I do not believe any modern interchangeable lens camera to be a bad performer in terms of image quality. Right now, to me, all the compact mirrorless bodies are fungible. With zero loyalties to tie me to anything, I appreciate features and ability to re-use some of my EF lenses.
In an absolute performance sense, when evaluated by itself, the EOS M is likely a fine camera. The problem is that it does not live in a vacuum, it can be compared against current mirrorless bodies and older mirrorless bodies. In my opinion, it does not stack up well against older bodies, let alone current bodies.
If we leave other brand mirrorless bodies out of the comparison and just compare the Sony mirrorless bodies (since the Metabones adapter allows AF with EF lenses and the Canon adapter allows AF with EF lenses), here is how the 2012 $850 EOS M compares (for me).
Using for the basis of comparison, the 2010 bodies (NEX 3, NEX 5):
-the EOS M is missing an articulating screen
-the EOS M has no possibility of a viewfinder (NEX 3 does not have one either)
-the EOS M has no focus peaking if I want to MF
-the EOS M has higher resolution
-the EOS M does not do 1080@60fps (NEX 3 does not do this either)
The 2012 EOS M is not matching the 2010 NEX bodies in some features that I would care about. The same issues stand out when compared with the 2011 NEX bodies and the 2012 NEX bodies. Why pay $850 for an EOS M when a used NEX 5 can likely be had for less than a quarter of the price, and will also be better?
Overall, for me, functionality-wise, I would slot the EOS M between the NEX "3" series and the NEX "5" series. Today, you could get at B&H:
$1150 NEX 7 with 18-55
$900 NEX 6 with 16-50
$850 EOS M with 18-55
$650 NEX 5R with 18-55
$500 NEX 3N with 16-50
In this context, the EOS M is grossly overpriced at $850, and thus, "feeble" for its price point. At $500ish, it would be competitive at its price point - not a world beater, just one more in a crowd. The Newegg sale price of $550 slots it price-wise just between the 5R and the 3N, pretty much where I think it should sit. I'd still reject it because of the no viewfinder thing, but that is just me.
And if you are willing to buy from overseas, it's cheaper still. I got the kit with the adapter, 18-55, 22 and 90ex for 870 or so new off ebay. At that price, it's a nice system that meshes well with my existing lenses. No US warranty though.
I just picked one up from last weekend's newegg sale.. $450 for the body and 22mm kit lens. I figured at that price it was worth the experiment.
Initial impressions are very good, at least IMO. AF is acceptable for this class of camera with the 22mm kit lens. I also bought the EF adapter and I've had mixed results with AF speed. AF of my USM lenses was fine but the couple of non USM lenses (Sigma 30 f/1.4 and 1st gen Sigma 17-70) was very slow. I'm thinking there just isn't enough power to AF the non USM lenses very fast.
That being said everything else I've been impressed with. Build quality is very nice, the controls are better then my Sony Nex 5n and the IQ is excellent. The 22mm kit lens is sharp and is better then the Sony kit lenses (16mm pancake and 18-55).
So far (in the 24 hours I've had it) it seems like a great pocket (or wife's purse) camera.
First couple of quick snapshots with it were of my dogs
I wanted to like it, but ended up with the Olympus OM-D instead. I need an viewfinder and a camera that works well all sorts conditions (moving subjects, etc). The M does not do this. Also Micro 43s has a wide selection of lenses.
I can't see why I'd buy it over the alternatives to be honest... I wouldn't realistically use my Canon lenses on it, which might have been the only advantage.
Not saying it's rubbish - I just think there's better on the market.
I wanted to like it too, but from the reviews I read it just didn't stack up to the competition and it still lacks a variety of lenses. There are so many other great options out there in the mirrorless and smaller sensor world I wouldn't waste my time with this version.
joeisayo wrote:
I would love to see Canon come out with an EF-S version of the EOS M's 22mm F/2.
That lens would be a sweet combo on the SL1.
You know that would have to be a completely different lens design to incorporate the much longer flange to sensor distance, right?
Phil -- If you already own a bunch of Canon EF lenses, especially EF-S, they would be usable on this M with just the simple adapter. It's not going to be a flat pancake camera/lens, but what's not to like having an APS-C sensor in a tiny body to capture high quality images and video?
I have been considering all mirror-less options lately and am very much drawn to an NEX 7 or Fuji X BUT the Eos M is stopping me from making this decision. Yes it has poor AF apparently and no EVF but for someone like me who has a lot of canon gear it really is the obvious choice. It is cheap for starters. The flash works as a wireless master and could be interchangeable as a fill flash or wireless master on my 5D2. The pancake lens makes it extremely portable for casual shooting (I rarely do much casual shooting because I don't want to carry around a heavy camera so this could change what I do) and the adaptor makes it a great backup for all my other lenses. The image quality is really good. Its much better for video than a Fuji and probably some other mirrorless sytems. I could conceivably put my tilt shift lens on and do landscape photography if I had to (yes I know I could do this with an adaptor on other cameras) and I always use liveview for landscapes anyway so don't need an EVF for this. I think the EOS should be considered as part of a Canon system along with DSLR's not a replacement for them. I'm hedging my bets now and hoping Canon will do a slightly higher spec model soon. And for the price of it maybe I will just buy a kit and see what its like myself instead of believing all the negative comments I see on the net.
I could use small bag for Rebel/40mm, and camera is way better by itself.