Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 18 Jul 2014 (Friday) 19:10
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

eos-m 55-200

 
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,461 posts
Gallery: 1788 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 11240
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jul 24, 2014 13:04 |  #16

frugivore wrote in post #17053327 (external link)
This is a significant difference for me:

http://camerasize.com …t/#351.427,351.​389.2,ha,t (external link)

To your eye yes. But put it into context:

1. You can't put that in your pocket. You need a bag or it's banging around hanging from a sling with a protruding lens (not great). So it's not compact anymore at all.

2. You still have to hold and control that lens with your 2nd hand. But you have to control the LCD with a hand too. The length of the lens isn't saving you any space. It's still a long lens that requires you to hold it and hold the camera. It's not like the EF-S version is heavy, those lenses are super light weight plastic.

3. Yet another lens that can only ever be used with your EOS-M. Not an issue if this is your only camera. But I think it's a massive disadvantage to buy such an expensive piece of entry glass for a compact system that renders it not compact, and cannot be used on your other EOS systems (assuming you have them). The true benefit of the `M in my eyes is that it can share lenses that you already have, or will have. And that it's not just another system to have to get the same lens over and over in different mount formats.

To me, the EOS-M's strength is that it's a compact interchangeable mirrorless camera with a really good 22mm F2 pancake lens. It still fits in my pocket this way. So it's compact enough for that. The strength that lead me to this purchase, over getting a much better mirrorless option (as the EOS-M is not even close to being one of the better mirrorless cameras) is that I can use my EF-S & EF lenses with it, making it instantly able to just be one more tool in the bag, a 2nd body, that doesn't take up the room of a full on gripped SLR, yet can share lenses. So it can go from pocket-compact to hooked up to a serious piece of kit without any trouble.

Personally I would never use the EOS-M as a primary camera. It's focus is too slow. It's a good still life, landscape, etc, type camera. But it's not good for active, moving stuff, at all. The autofocus system is quite painful. I often manually focus with it because I'm frankly faster. But I still love this little camera because it's little, and has the ability to use powerful fast primes. The pancake 22 is the reason I have the EOS-M. If it were not for that lens, I'd have no reason to have this camera honestly, because it's not compact anymore the moment I am not using a pancake lens. If that were the case, I'd have gotten the SL1, as it's better in every way the moment you're not able to put it in your pocket.

Just the thoughts of an EOS-M owner/shooter.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Eastport
Senior Member
Avatar
940 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 47
Joined Apr 2009
     
Jul 24, 2014 13:19 |  #17

frugivore wrote in post #17053327 (external link)
This is a significant difference for me:

http://camerasize.com …t/#351.427,351.​389.2,ha,t (external link)

Mounting the adaptor and the 55-250 STM EF-S lens on the EOS-M vs the SL1 and the same lens (which needs no adaptor for EF and EF-S lenses) is pretty close to the same size and I'll take the SL1 any day over the EOS-M.

See the sizes here:

http://camerasize.com …27,351.389.2,44​8.389,ha,t (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kanadary
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
102 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2012
Location: seattle
     
Jul 24, 2014 14:34 as a reply to  @ Eastport's post |  #18

for me it was the novelty i guess, there's not a large range of lens out there for the m. i got a 11-22 for my daughter and that's now her favorite walk around lens, sure i could have gotten the 10-22 or the 10-18 now, and also allowed my other daughter to take advantage of her sl1 but this way she has a way cool m set up. i am thinking of getting the m2 for her but from all the reviews, the upgrade isn't really warranted.. its better in af but that's about it. maybe i should have saved the $$ and upgraded my 5d ii to the iii or be a third of the way to my 200 1.8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,580 posts
Likes: 1738
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Jul 24, 2014 15:07 |  #19

MalVeauX wrote in post #17053118 (external link)
Heya,

I didn't bother.

I use the Fotodiox EOS-M <- EF-S/EF adapter ($50) and just use the EF-S 55-250 IS with it. I'd rather not have more `M lenses since they can't be used with anything else. The only `M lens I'm using is the 22mm pancake. I find that once you get any other lens on the `M other than the pancake, it defeats why you got the pancake (compact). So I don't bother with `M lenses. I just use my EF-S/EF line lenses.

Very best,

Try 11-22 on it.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frugivore
Goldmember
Avatar
3,089 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 118
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Jul 24, 2014 15:08 |  #20

MalVeauX wrote in post #17053360 (external link)
To your eye yes.

Let's look again:


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


If all else between these two lenses was equal (i.e. focal range and max f-stop), this would sway me toward the EF-M, even if it is slightly more expensive.

But put it into context:

1. You can't put that in your pocket. You need a bag or it's banging around hanging from a sling with a protruding lens (not great). So it's not compact anymore at all.

But neither are any interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras with longer lenses. I have a very small bag for my M gear. The SL1+18-55mm+10-22mm+40mm(closest equivalent to the 22mm) would take up more space. I would probably be able to squeeze in this 55-200mm if I wanted to.

The M with its native zooms may not be a compact camera, but it is a compact system.

2. You still have to hold and control that lens with your 2nd hand. But you have to control the LCD with a hand too. The length of the lens isn't saving you any space. It's still a long lens that requires you to hold it and hold the camera. It's not like the EF-S version is heavy, those lenses are super light weight plastic.

I'm not sure I follow. No, the M is not as easy to handle as a DSLR. But aside from using the zoom ring to change focal length, I don't really use my left hand to control or hold the camera.

3. Yet another lens that can only ever be used with your EOS-M. Not an issue if this is your only camera. But I think it's a massive disadvantage to buy such an expensive piece of entry glass for a compact system that renders it not compact, and cannot be used on your other EOS systems (assuming you have them). The true benefit of the `M in my eyes is that it can share lenses that you already have, or will have. And that it's not just another system to have to get the same lens over and over in different mount formats.

Yes, it is an advantage to share all lenses between all cameras. But if all my lenses are EF mount, it doesn't make sense for me to get an M for a backup body. I'd rather just get a Rebel or a good condition 5D. Heck, even if I had just EF-S lenses, I still wouldn't buy the M as a backup. I bought the M because it provided great IQ for a low price, to be shared with my wife who swore she'd never use an optical viewfinder. There really is no boundary when a camera is no longer classified as compact. Smaller and lighter is just that, regardless of whether you can pocket a camera or not. If I didn't have the M to take advantage of the tiny 22mm, I'd probably buy an RX100 for this purpose. Now *that's* pocketable!

To me, the EOS-M's strength is that it's a compact interchangeable mirrorless camera with a really good 22mm F2 pancake lens. It still fits in my pocket this way. So it's compact enough for that. The strength that lead me to this purchase, over getting a much better mirrorless option (as the EOS-M is not even close to being one of the better mirrorless cameras) is that I can use my EF-S & EF lenses with it, making it instantly able to just be one more tool in the bag, a 2nd body, that doesn't take up the room of a full on gripped SLR, yet can share lenses. So it can go from pocket-compact to hooked up to a serious piece of kit without any trouble.

The M really is like a multi-tool, isn't it? Another strength, for me, is that it can use my Canon speedlites.

Personally I would never use the EOS-M as a primary camera. It's focus is too slow. It's a good still life, landscape, etc, type camera. But it's not good for active, moving stuff, at all. The autofocus system is quite painful. I often manually focus with it because I'm frankly faster. But I still love this little camera because it's little, and has the ability to use powerful fast primes. The pancake 22 is the reason I have the EOS-M. If it were not for that lens, I'd have no reason to have this camera honestly, because it's not compact anymore the moment I am not using a pancake lens. If that were the case, I'd have gotten the SL1, as it's better in every way the moment you're not able to put it in your pocket.

Just the thoughts of an EOS-M owner/shooter.

Very best,

I just use it for non-action photography as well. Aside from slower AF, another problem is low light AF. The AF assist light that it emits is not very good in most cases. But what can you do?

Eastport wrote in post #17053387 (external link)
Mounting the adaptor and the 55-250 STM EF-S lens on the EOS-M vs the SL1 and the same lens (which needs no adaptor for EF and EF-S lenses) is pretty close to the same size and I'll take the SL1 any day over the EOS-M.

See the sizes here:

http://camerasize.com …27,351.389.2,44​8.389,ha,t (external link)

I would too, if I had to choose between that combination.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,461 posts
Gallery: 1788 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 11240
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jul 24, 2014 15:58 as a reply to  @ frugivore's post |  #21

bobbyz wrote in post #17053600 (external link)
Try 11-22 on it.

Again, I have no reason. I already have a very sharp and fast 11-16 F2.8 lens that adapts to it. Why spend $500 on an ultrawide for the EOS-M when I have an ultrawide that works on APS-C and full frame? It's a bigger lens by far. But the whole thing is no longer compact and pocketable the moment I put ANY lens on it other than the 22mm pancake. I do not find the EOS-M lenses beyond the pancake appealing at all because even though they are smaller, they are costly for what is essentially kit-level glass, but are still big enough that they make the system require a bag and it's just no longer able to drop in my pocket.

EOS-M with 22mm pancake goes in my pocket. Again, this is just my use of it. It's easy for anyone to handle, great for travel due to size, and it serves as my 3rd camera when I'm not lugging my full frame around, I like having a light small APS-C and the compact EOS-M that literally goes in my pocket. I can put the same lenses on both when I need that second body. But otherwise, again, it's a compact camera with 22mm pancake.

Again, if it were not for the 22mm pancake, I would never have gotten the EOS-M. I have zero use for a smaller camera that still requires a bag and takes up space as such, when I already have several SLR's. The `M is for my pocket, and also because it shares lenses with my EOS system. I didn't want a P&S, but I wanted a compact pocketable camera with a good fast prime. The EOS-M is that.

All of this is just my way of thinking about it. I'm not trying to sway someone away from the EOS-M system. It's good for certain things. But it's also not good for certain things. If it's your only camera and will be your only camera, the EOS-M lenses make sense. They're costly for what they are. But if that's all you're ever gonna carry, then it works. If you have other EOS systems, chances are you have other glass, and then it makes no sense to get M glass when you can just share.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,230 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2769
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jul 24, 2014 16:31 |  #22

i pretty much agree with malveaux...although i can't really fit it into any pockets unless i'm wearing a jacket...if i was going to get another lens for it, it would probably be the tamron 18-200mm, because then it'd just be a small all in one...although the 11-22mm does intrigue me for backpacking trips...but over all i'm fine with what i lug out there.


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,674 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3972
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jul 25, 2014 08:24 |  #23

MalVeauX wrote in post #17053360 (external link)
To your eye yes. But put it into context:

1. You can't put that in your pocket. You need a bag or it's banging around hanging from a sling with a protruding lens (not great). So it's not compact anymore at all.

2. You still have to hold and control that lens with your 2nd hand. But you have to control the LCD with a hand too. The length of the lens isn't saving you any space. It's still a long lens that requires you to hold it and hold the camera. It's not like the EF-S version is heavy, those lenses are super light weight plastic.

3. Yet another lens that can only ever be used with your EOS-M. Not an issue if this is your only camera. But I think it's a massive disadvantage to buy such an expensive piece of entry glass for a compact system that renders it not compact, and cannot be used on your other EOS systems (assuming you have them). The true benefit of the `M in my eyes is that it can share lenses that you already have, or will have. And that it's not just another system to have to get the same lens over and over in different mount formats.

To me, the EOS-M's strength is that it's a compact interchangeable mirrorless camera with a really good 22mm F2 pancake lens. It still fits in my pocket this way. So it's compact enough for that. The strength that lead me to this purchase, over getting a much better mirrorless option (as the EOS-M is not even close to being one of the better mirrorless cameras) is that I can use my EF-S & EF lenses with it, making it instantly able to just be one more tool in the bag, a 2nd body, that doesn't take up the room of a full on gripped SLR, yet can share lenses. So it can go from pocket-compact to hooked up to a serious piece of kit without any trouble.

Personally I would never use the EOS-M as a primary camera. It's focus is too slow. It's a good still life, landscape, etc, type camera. But it's not good for active, moving stuff, at all. The autofocus system is quite painful. I often manually focus with it because I'm frankly faster. But I still love this little camera because it's little, and has the ability to use powerful fast primes. The pancake 22 is the reason I have the EOS-M. If it were not for that lens, I'd have no reason to have this camera honestly, because it's not compact anymore the moment I am not using a pancake lens. If that were the case, I'd have gotten the SL1, as it's better in every way the moment you're not able to put it in your pocket.

Just the thoughts of an EOS-M owner/shooter.

Very best,

I see what you're saying, but from my experience with my Fuji system, it's not quite the same.

I do find myself more often than not sticking my Fuji lenses on over my adapted lenses (other than my 28mm recently because of the faster aperture + focal reducer) simply because they are less bulky and heavy. When the camera is hanging around my neck or shoulder I don't want extra weight causing an imbalance, it's much easier to sling over a shoulder and forget about when you have a super light and small lens.

I don't know that I'd buy it for my M, but that's because I have my Fuji... if I only had the M I probably would get the new 55-200mm, it looks like a great lens.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdickerson
Member
102 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Solvang, Ca, USA
     
Jul 25, 2014 21:05 |  #24

MalVeauX wrote in post #17053360 (external link)
To your eye yes. But put it into context:

1. You can't put that in your pocket. You need a bag or it's banging around hanging from a sling with a protruding lens (not great). So it's not compact anymore at all.

2. You still have to hold and control that lens with your 2nd hand. But you have to control the LCD with a hand too. The length of the lens isn't saving you any space. It's still a long lens that requires you to hold it and hold the camera. It's not like the EF-S version is heavy, those lenses are super light weight plastic.

3. Yet another lens that can only ever be used with your EOS-M. Not an issue if this is your only camera. But I think it's a massive disadvantage to buy such an expensive piece of entry glass for a compact system that renders it not compact, and cannot be used on your other EOS systems (assuming you have them). The true benefit of the `M in my eyes is that it can share lenses that you already have, or will have. And that it's not just another system to have to get the same lens over and over in different mount formats.

To me, the EOS-M's strength is that it's a compact interchangeable mirrorless camera with a really good 22mm F2 pancake lens. It still fits in my pocket this way. So it's compact enough for that. The strength that lead me to this purchase, over getting a much better mirrorless option (as the EOS-M is not even close to being one of the better mirrorless cameras) is that I can use my EF-S & EF lenses with it, making it instantly able to just be one more tool in the bag, a 2nd body, that doesn't take up the room of a full on gripped SLR, yet can share lenses. So it can go from pocket-compact to hooked up to a serious piece of kit without any trouble.

Personally I would never use the EOS-M as a primary camera. It's focus is too slow. It's a good still life, landscape, etc, type camera. But it's not good for active, moving stuff, at all. The autofocus system is quite painful. I often manually focus with it because I'm frankly faster. But I still love this little camera because it's little, and has the ability to use powerful fast primes. The pancake 22 is the reason I have the EOS-M. If it were not for that lens, I'd have no reason to have this camera honestly, because it's not compact anymore the moment I am not using a pancake lens. If that were the case, I'd have gotten the SL1, as it's better in every way the moment you're not able to put it in your pocket.

Just the thoughts of an EOS-M owner/shooter.

Very best,

I am carrying the "M", all four lenses w/hoods, 90EX, extension tubes (Fotga), batteries, cards, circular polarizer, etc., in a smallish Mountain Smith fanny pack (TLS Kinetic). I could never do that with a 55-250, or my 70-200L, plus adapter.

Yes I do use a case, but a much smaller/lighter one than with other options. I bike and kayak with this kit, so size is an issue. As the Brits say," horses for courses".

JD




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rey
Senior Member
571 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2006
Location: SoCal
     
Aug 18, 2014 13:39 |  #25

So any sample photos with this lens yet? I'm thinking about possibly picking one up in Tokyo when I visit in a few weeks.


Canon 5D MKII • BG-E6 • Canon EOS-M • Canon 85mm F1.2L II USM • Canon 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM • Canon 16-35mm F2.8L II USM • Canon 24-70mm F2.8L USM • Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM • Sigma 50mm F1.4 ART • Canon Speedlight 600 EX-RT • Canon Speedlite 580EX II • Canon Speedlite 430EX II • Gitzo 3530 • Really Right Stuff BH-55 LR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Abu ­ Mahendra
Senior Member
368 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
     
Aug 19, 2014 01:49 |  #26
bannedPermanent ban

MalVeauX wrote in post #17053118 (external link)
Heya,

I didn't bother.

I use the Fotodiox EOS-M <- EF-S/EF adapter ($50) and just use the EF-S 55-250 IS with it. I'd rather not have more `M lenses since they can't be used with anything else. The only `M lens I'm using is the 22mm pancake. I find that once you get any other lens on the `M other than the pancake, it defeats why you got the pancake (compact). So I don't bother with `M lenses. I just use my EF-S/EF line lenses.

Very best,

The EF-M 11-22IS is exceedingly good. It is still lighter, smaller, faster and with a wider range than the 10-18. I've tested it against the 16-35IS and it is right on its heels. You ignore it at your own peril.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
speedync
Goldmember
1,488 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Likes: 821
Joined May 2011
Location: Geelong, Australia
     
Aug 20, 2014 07:26 |  #27

Abu Mahendra wrote in post #17104785 (external link)
The EF-M 11-22IS is exceedingly good. It is still lighter, smaller, faster and with a wider range than the 10-18. I've tested it against the 16-35IS and it is right on its heels. You ignore it at your own peril.

^^^^^^^^^This + a million. I hated my M until I bought the 11-22. All of a sudden the camera made sense. Fantastic little lens. To limit yourself to just the 22 pancake is missing out badly in my opinion. Once you figure out how to use the AF, it's actually not that bad. With the 11-22, 22 pancake, adapter & 40 mm pancake, it's actually a pretty good little system. I was thinking about the 55-250 STM for mine, but will wait 'till I can get a hands on with the 55-200. I've found the M specific lenses much nicer than your average kit lenses, in both build & IQ.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
speedync
Goldmember
1,488 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Likes: 821
Joined May 2011
Location: Geelong, Australia
     
Aug 20, 2014 07:39 |  #28

MalVeauX wrote in post #17053360 (external link)
To your eye yes. But put it into context:

1. You can't put that in your pocket. You need a bag or it's banging around hanging from a sling with a protruding lens (not great). So it's not compact anymore at all.

Neither is any interchangeable lens camera. That's the whole point of an interchangeable lens system, to be able to change lenses. Not just stick with 1

3. Yet another lens that can only ever be used with your EOS-M. Not an issue if this is your only camera. But I think it's a massive disadvantage to buy such an expensive piece of entry glass for a compact system that renders it not compact, and cannot be used on your other EOS systems (assuming you have them). The true benefit of the `M in my eyes is that it can share lenses that you already have, or will have. And that it's not just another system to have to get the same lens over and over in different mount formats.

What's wrong with that. Some of us own full frame cameras as well, and any EF S lens would be a "waste" looking at it the way you do. Doesn't worry me. Use the lenses for their strengths. Which is not just purely size, or lack thereof. There are more lenses in the system than just the 22 pancake, which you seem blinded by :)

Personally I would never use the EOS-M as a primary camera. It's focus is too slow. It's a good still life, landscape, etc, type camera. But it's not good for active, moving stuff, at all.

People say the same thing about the 6D. I have both. Thye're not that bad.
Very best,

.......




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Abu ­ Mahendra
Senior Member
368 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
     
Aug 20, 2014 09:22 |  #29
bannedPermanent ban

speedync wrote in post #17107053 (external link)
^^^^^^^^^This + a million. I hated my M until I bought the 11-22. All of a sudden the camera made sense. Fantastic little lens. To limit yourself to just the 22 pancake is missing out badly in my opinion. Once you figure out how to use the AF, it's actually not that bad. With the 11-22, 22 pancake, adapter & 40 mm pancake, it's actually a pretty good little system. I was thinking about the 55-250 STM for mine, but will wait 'till I can get a hands on with the 55-200. I've found the M specific lenses much nicer than your average kit lenses, in both build & IQ.

IMAGE: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102652144/IMG_4000.JPG

IMAGE: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102652144/IMG_4060.JPG

IMAGE: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102652144/IMG_4072.JPG



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clacson
Member
60 posts
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Southern Finland
     
Aug 21, 2014 00:48 |  #30

MalVeauX wrote in post #17053118 (external link)
Heya,

I didn't bother.

I use the Fotodiox EOS-M <- EF-S/EF adapter ($50) and just use the EF-S 55-250 IS with it. I'd rather not have more `M lenses since they can't be used with anything else. The only `M lens I'm using is the 22mm pancake. I find that once you get any other lens on the `M other than the pancake, it defeats why you got the pancake (compact). So I don't bother with `M lenses. I just use my EF-S/EF line lenses.

Very best,

If you have only EOS M and EOS full frame, there is no sense to buy EF-S lenses. Then you buy real EF lenses for FF and EF-M lenses for M.


| Canon EOS 6D | EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 40mm f/2.8 STM, Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 DG II HSM |
| Canon EOS M | EF-M 11-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM, EOS EF-M adapter |
| Film Age: Canon EOS 33v, Canon EOS 5 |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

9,332 views & 0 likes for this thread
eos-m 55-200
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is brservices
1083 guests, 372 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.