1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

FINALLY got a chance to shoot a little with the EOS-M

Discussion in 'Canon EOS M Forum' started by wt21, Aug 8, 2013.

  1. wt21

    wt21 SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 15, 2010
    Just testing around the yard.

    The controls are very surprisingly easy to use. The LCD touch screen with just about everything you need. The shutter sound is fabulous. The camera has a nice heft and feel. I don't mind the "soap bar" approach. I always use a wrist strap.

    Yes, it's a little slow, but it's funny how the Fuji and some others get kudos for helping one "slow down" and "think through the shot" but not so much the M ;)

    I did some inside high ISO testing. The sensor output is sub-OMD, but at low ISO, it's pretty nice. The thing that makes this camera nice is the 22mm lens and the controls are better than I thought.

    ALL FOR $300!!!

    The lens has a "richness" to it.
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/98981882@N05/9468968314/" title="20121203-20121203-IMG_5785 by wt2100, on Flickr">"800" height="534" alt="20121203-20121203-IMG_5785"></a>

    Smooooth bokeh
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/98981882@N05/9468969024/" title="20130808-20130808-IMG_5801 by wt2100, on Flickr">[​IMG]"800" height="534" alt="20130808-20130808-IMG_5801"></a>

    like those bokeh balls! (reminds me of a CV40/1.4 I once had). I love fun bokeh :)
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/98981882@N05/9466188703/" title="20130808-20130808-IMG_5806 by wt2100, on Flickr"> 9466188703_3c7152675d_c. "534" height="800" alt="20130808-20130808-IMG_5806"></a>

    Close focus (.15m)
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/98981882@N05/9468971566/" title="20130808-20130808-IMG_5808 by wt2100, on Flickr"> 9468971566_56b8042db3_c. "800" height="450" alt="20130808-20130808-IMG_5808"></a>

    stupid art filter tricks. Applied easily in camera after taking the pic (sorry -- dumb pic)
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/98981882@N05/9468967528/" title="20121203-20121203-IMG_5793 by wt2100, on Flickr">"800" height="534" alt="20121203-20121203-IMG_5793"></a>

    After effects applied in LR.
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/98981882@N05/9466209971/" title="20130808-20130808-IMG_5816 by wt2100, on Flickr"> 9466209971_72e7fb2fd4_c. "534" height="800" alt="20130808-20130808-IMG_5816"></a>
     
    • Like Like x 4
  2. Armanius

    Armanius Bring Jack back!

    Jan 11, 2011
    Houston, Texas
    Jack
    Do you like it better than ... say ... an EPL5? :rolleyes:
     
  3. Ghosthunter

    Ghosthunter boo!

    Sep 8, 2010
    London UK
    Andy
    Well I think they look damn good!! What excellent value for money!! Let's face it if you stripped the exif data you could say it was something far better and no one would know which makes the whole IQ this and that debate a bit of a joke!

    Well done you!:thumbup:
     
  4. wt21

    wt21 SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 15, 2010
    lol. No! EPL5 rocks! If someone sells you an EPL5 they are doing you a FAVOR! :D

    I do miss the tilty LCD. EPL5 is also a faster camera. Having shot m43 since 2009, I just wanted to make a break and try something else. Clean slate.

    I'm having fun right now, yes -- shiny toy. New things to discover. But I don't know that I'd recommend the M over an EPL5. Depends on what you are looking for I guess. I do think, though, that the 22/2 is better than the 17/1.8 and maybe even the 20/1.7. I really like this lens.
     
  5. Armanius

    Armanius Bring Jack back!

    Jan 11, 2011
    Houston, Texas
    Jack
    LOL! I'm finding the EPL5 to be a little too small for my hands! I might need to use the larger grip. I'm also spoiled by all the dials and buttons on the OMD. So I find the EPL5 more difficult to use from an operational standpoint.

    Your photos do bring life to the EOS-M, for sure! Well done.

    As for the 17/1.8 (my current favorite m4/3 lens), I do wish that it was a bit more pancake-like.
     
  6. wt21

    wt21 SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 15, 2010
    I don't think the EOS-M would be any better than the EPL5 in terms of size. They're about the same size functionally.
     
  7. Hyubie

    Hyubie SC Veteran

    360
    Jun 8, 2011
    Massachusetts
    Going all in for Canon, Bill? :biggrin:

    Very nice output - amen to what Andy said that this looks like a great bang-for-the-buck camera.
     
  8. Armanius

    Armanius Bring Jack back!

    Jan 11, 2011
    Houston, Texas
    Jack
    Bill is starting his own party with K-01 and Q.
     
  9. drd1135

    drd1135 SC Hall of Famer

    Jul 13, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    I have both the PL5 and the M and they are very close image-wise. The PL5 is faster, especially the AF. The M's Raw files seem to have more noise but they clean up really well in PS. Maybe Canon gets a bit more attention from Adobe than Olympus. I leave the 45 on the PL5 and the 22 on the M and just grab the appropriate body. ILCs or not, it's the "bag of compacts" approach.
     
  10. stratokaster

    stratokaster SC Top Veteran

    886
    Dec 27, 2010
    Kiev, Ukraine
    Pavel
    I like the image quality of the EOS M, but its controls and AF speed — not so much.

    Inclusion of the external mic socket is a nice touch. Combined with Magic Lantern you get a VERY capable small video machine. If you're interested in video, that is.

    I suspect any NEX is a better second camera for a Canon shooter than EOS M. NEXes have better sensors and you can use one of so-called "smart" adapters to shoot NEX with your Canon lenses with electronic aperture control and even IS.
     
  11. RT Panther

    RT Panther SC All-Pro

    Dec 25, 2012
    So I'm one of the few that actually notices the DOF differences between MFT & APS-C (Hence why I have a NEX - although my primary system is still MFT). But NEX is missing a native fast pancake prime like the Canon 22m ƒ2.0 :smile:
     
  12. wt21

    wt21 SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 15, 2010
    IMO, OT and also possibly :026:

    Will anyone ever let "NEX vs. m43" topic DIE???
     
  13. stratokaster

    stratokaster SC Top Veteran

    886
    Dec 27, 2010
    Kiev, Ukraine
    Pavel
    I definitely notice it, although in most cases MFT lenses are faster than comparable Sony NEX lenses and that offsets the difference in DOF introduced by the larger sensor. Samsung NX, on the other hand... :118:
     
  14. stratokaster

    stratokaster SC Top Veteran

    886
    Dec 27, 2010
    Kiev, Ukraine
    Pavel
    Never! There will always be some insecurity on the part of Micro 4/3 users because of smaller sensor size. Also quite possible envy directed towards owners of better-endowed cameras. :rolleyes:
     
  15. Hyubie

    Hyubie SC Veteran

    360
    Jun 8, 2011
    Massachusetts
    It's not the size of the boat, it's the motion of the ocean
     
  16. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Nic
    APS-C and Micro 4/3 sensor size debates?

    I believe that Happy Gilmore once said, "Gold jacket, green jacket, who gives a $%&@."
     
  17. RT Panther

    RT Panther SC All-Pro

    Dec 25, 2012
    Not off topic since someone asked earlier within this thread if you like it better than the E-PL5 :smile: Blame that person instead of me...:026:
     
  18. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    come now boys......fight nice. I don't feel like putting my moderator cape on today.
     
  19. stratokaster

    stratokaster SC Top Veteran

    886
    Dec 27, 2010
    Kiev, Ukraine
    Pavel
    Who said we were fighting? Merely beating a long-dead horse :tongue:
     
  20. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    once people start responding and defending themselves, it crosses over from beating the dead horse to argument. Arguments over DOF control belong on DPReview or over at Mu-43. :biggrin: