wt21
Hall of Famer
How many people assume EOS-M AF is terrible?
Some still, right? But most people would begrudgingly say it's OK for still objects, but only with the firmware mind you!
Well, I wouldn't disagree. But, for still life, landscape, etc. it is fast enough. It's also fast enough for portrait, IMO. Just not moving kids or action/sports.
OK, well, how many folks know that it's horrible with adapted EOS lenses. Everyone, right?
Well, turns out -- wrong.
I finally gave in and got the fotodiox EOS to EOS-M adapter. I've now been able to test the native 22mm and the native 11-22, and also my EOS lens collection: 40mm 2.8 STM (bought this with the adapter), 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and my old 70-210 USM zoom. Also a Tamron 28-75/2.8.
I am very surprised to report that the 40mm STM focuses just as fast as the 22mm. I would even say the camera may focus faster than the XE1 + 35/1.4 from Fuji (though I no longer have the Fuji, so I can't compare directly). The 11-22 might focus a bit faster than both (then again, it doesn't have to far to move to focus at small aperture wide angle).
But even MORE surprisingly is that my 85/1.8 and 50/1.4 (both USM) focus just as fast as the 40. Even my 70-210USM focuses fast, though it seems more prone to miss focus than the others. Lastly, my Tamron 28-75/2.8 focuses a little slower than the others, but it's a micro-motor and not USM, and focuses slower than the other lenses even on my 6D, so no surprise there.
I hope Canon releases more pancakes for their EOS-M 2 (to be announced soon, rumor has it), but even if they don't, and if you have a collection of EOS lenses, the M is perfectly serviceable AF for hiking, landscape, still like, walk-about type shooting.
I don't know how often I'll use the other lenses, but the 40/2.8 STM with the adapter (i.e. the two together) is just a little smaller than the Canon 50mm 1.8 plastic fantastic lens.
To put it another way, it's also a bit smaller (lens + adapter) than the PL25. If you have a body+lens smaller than the size of the EPM + PL25, I would say that's pretty darn compact. And still super affordable (EOS-M + 22 = $300 plus $50 fotodiox and $140 40mm lens = $500 for two very nice lenses on a pocket mirrorless body)
Two this morning with the 40/2.8 STM
20131003-20131003-IMG_6461 by wt2100, on Flickr
20131003-20131003-IMG_6467 by wt2100, on Flickr
Some still, right? But most people would begrudgingly say it's OK for still objects, but only with the firmware mind you!
Well, I wouldn't disagree. But, for still life, landscape, etc. it is fast enough. It's also fast enough for portrait, IMO. Just not moving kids or action/sports.
OK, well, how many folks know that it's horrible with adapted EOS lenses. Everyone, right?
Well, turns out -- wrong.
I finally gave in and got the fotodiox EOS to EOS-M adapter. I've now been able to test the native 22mm and the native 11-22, and also my EOS lens collection: 40mm 2.8 STM (bought this with the adapter), 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and my old 70-210 USM zoom. Also a Tamron 28-75/2.8.
I am very surprised to report that the 40mm STM focuses just as fast as the 22mm. I would even say the camera may focus faster than the XE1 + 35/1.4 from Fuji (though I no longer have the Fuji, so I can't compare directly). The 11-22 might focus a bit faster than both (then again, it doesn't have to far to move to focus at small aperture wide angle).
But even MORE surprisingly is that my 85/1.8 and 50/1.4 (both USM) focus just as fast as the 40. Even my 70-210USM focuses fast, though it seems more prone to miss focus than the others. Lastly, my Tamron 28-75/2.8 focuses a little slower than the others, but it's a micro-motor and not USM, and focuses slower than the other lenses even on my 6D, so no surprise there.
I hope Canon releases more pancakes for their EOS-M 2 (to be announced soon, rumor has it), but even if they don't, and if you have a collection of EOS lenses, the M is perfectly serviceable AF for hiking, landscape, still like, walk-about type shooting.
I don't know how often I'll use the other lenses, but the 40/2.8 STM with the adapter (i.e. the two together) is just a little smaller than the Canon 50mm 1.8 plastic fantastic lens.
To put it another way, it's also a bit smaller (lens + adapter) than the PL25. If you have a body+lens smaller than the size of the EPM + PL25, I would say that's pretty darn compact. And still super affordable (EOS-M + 22 = $300 plus $50 fotodiox and $140 40mm lens = $500 for two very nice lenses on a pocket mirrorless body)
Two this morning with the 40/2.8 STM
20131003-20131003-IMG_6461 by wt2100, on Flickr
20131003-20131003-IMG_6467 by wt2100, on Flickr