New Canon EOS M5 Mirrorless

Strick wrote in post #18130207
Maybe but not me. I like mirrorless for the less bulk of the lenses. While the SL1 maybe small it still has to use EF/Ef-S lenses, no upside to it at all IMO. Besides it is still considerably thicker.

Which is where the lack of lenses for the m becomes an issue...and has a lot of people talking about using the adapter on the m5

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18130204
I think this is the comparison we are looking for;

http://camerasize.com/​compare/#684,448

Hosted photo: posted by CyberDyneSystems in
./showthread.php?p=181​30204&i=i110487895
forum: Canon EOS Digital Cameras

Thanks, Cyber. Was looking for this comparison.

I'm keeping my SL1. Until the price of the M5 comes down to $499 USD.

Love all the gadgets and updates on the M5 but size and weight are its real selling point and it seems there's little difference with the SL1 - even before adding the adaptor to the M5.

And I prefer the OVF over the M5's EVF. But that's just me.

Will I really get significantly better shots with the M5? I doubt it.

DreDaze wrote in post #18130237
Which is where the lack of lenses for the m becomes an issue...and has a lot of people talking about using the adapter on the m5

anyone buying into the M should beware of lenses..... it's been how long since the M lineup was created? Canon simply doesnt give a hoot about that lineup, they'll only start caring when one of the bodies turns into a hit. Native lenses on release was 2? 4 years after that maybe 4,5 lenses? Excruciatingly slow release cycle, and the first 3 bodies were considered failures.

Eastport wrote in post #18130239
Thanks, Cyber. Was looking for this comparison.

I'm keeping my SL1. Until the price of the M5 comes down to $499 USD.

Love all the gadgets and updates on the M5 but size and weight are its real selling point and it seems there's little difference with the SL1 - even before adding the adaptor to the M5.

And I prefer the OVF over the M5's EVF. But that's just me.

Will I really get significantly better shots with the M5? I doubt it.

The SL1 has no equivalent EF-M 22, which should be only slightly larger than the SL1 when mounted on the M5. Other than that, not a tremendous amount of size savings, since canon doesnt provide smallish primes.

I've never taken a serious look at Sony's mirrorless system, but I just now looked at their native E-mount lenses and see some really nice options. Of course, they are pricey. In comparison, Canon's EF-M options are limited but a great value. I wish Canon had just one long fast prime lens for crop sensors. Like an EF-S/M 60mm f/1.4.

I have the original EOS M with only the 18-55mm and use it as a general family/vacation camera. I take a lot of video so I'd want an upgrade to have improvements in this area. PDAF, touch screen and EFV should make for spectacular video. As for stills, I'm happy with any camera as long as it's good a hot shoe.

Efs 24 mm pancake or the 40mm Ef.

thc1979 wrote in post #18130166
Honestly I would rather do that for someone that'll use it than give it away so someone to make a profit.

sucks they want to gouge your eyes out for a few bob. try mpb, mifsuds, jessops et al to see if the are any better. failing that pm me and we'll talk seriously about a sale

Philihase wrote in post #18130334
Efs 24 mm pancake or the 40mm Ef.

both work on the M5 as well, + the size of the adapter will be the same as the SL1, however, the M22 is a full stop faster AND smaller.. that's gotta count for something.

this may not apply for many folks, but I'm a bit particular about carrying gear, and on casual stuff, I'll simply shove everything into a small bag that hooks on my belt. Only a few combos can do this, the EOS-M is one, and my Sony setup is another. DSLR simply wouldnt fit with the exception of SL1 + pancake, that Might fit, but shooting F2.8 on APS-C might just give me a depression

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

WA Tiger wrote in post #18130061
I would also like to know the lenses people will be getting for their complete set with this camera. ONLY EF-M lenses, out of the 7 lenses available what would you have in your kit, or all of them?

I'd get the 22 f/2 and the 28mm Macro..

Definitely the 28mm macro...

Beyond that? Nothing. The rest of the lenses are just not interesting.. Sure i can use my EF lenses on it but those are just for different things

Thats the sad thing, love the 28mm macro, like seriously, but theres a severe lack of lenses for the Canon EF-M system, Canon NEEDS a 35 f/1.8 and a 50 f/1.8

One reason i really like Micro 4/3.. Consider for similar size to the 18-55 you can get the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8.. Really comparing to APS-C Micro 4/3 doesnt come out "short" in its isolation capability.. Lenses like the 12-35 and 35-100 Panasonic are the size of the typical APS-C kit lens (18-55 55-250) but isolate like a constant f/4 on APS-C. I have a pocketable macro lens in the 45mm f/2.8 Macro-Elmar. My 15mm f/1.7 fits in my pocket too... in terms of DoF im not that far off of the EF-M 22mm either mind you...(f/3.2 equivalent vs f/3.4 equivalent..Do you really think theres a difference there?)

thc1979 wrote in post #18130162
For my M3 I have the 10-22, 18-55 and 55-200. I don't think I need any more than that. Some faster lenses would be nice I'm sure it'll happen one day. The M series are basically a holiday/day out camera, for anything serious I use a dslr or medium format. People seem to have high expectations for the M5

Excellent, cheers, sounds like the go for me too. What about the new 55-150mm? Is there much difference between that and the 200mm, other than 50mm of course?

Also here

GX8, GX85, A6000 and M5

15mm f/1.7 Summilux, Zeiss Sonnar 24mm f/1.8 and the 22mm f/2

The M5 is quite tiny I'll give it that...But thats why i wonder on the ergonomics, i have a VERY hard time with a camera with no grip.. i tried the GX85 in store recently and I found it difficult to use because my hands wont grip it easily...I have issues with my hands and etc.. the A6000/A6300 are about as "small" as i can go...

Also how big is the M5's viewfinder? The GX8 has a viewfinder about the size of the A7. Seriously. The GX85 is like the GX7 with a tiny 16:9 viewfinder, the A6000 and A6300 viewfinders are nice though...

And no i am not "biased" or at least i TRY not to be here, IF I replaced my GX8 I'd CONSIDER the A7II. But I still dont feel any mirrorless can compete with my dslr for my wildlife stuff... and id lose the GX8 macro advantages on the A7II... So if anything id really consider buying an Olympus instead, like the new EM1-II thats coming to gain access to the ultra high res shooting mode and stuff...

A lot of the m4/3 lenses are superb optically mind you, focus really quickly and have a very lovely rendition to them, Especially the leica ones, a lens isnt all about maximum aperture sometimes (Go check out photos from the 42.5mm f/1.2 DG Noctilux sometime..or the Olympus 75mm f/1.8)

Also know something i HATE on all the mirrorless cameras? When you remove a lens its exposed sensor city. Seriously why dont they shut the shutter over the sensor to protect it during lens changes.. I dont know why i feel really nervous switching lenses on my GX8 compared to ANY DSLR

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

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

I notice everyone is using camerasize.com to compare, when i looked at the m5 to m3, top view seems to be clearly wrong...shows the m3 looking bigger...

I can't wait to marry the M5 to my Sigma 150-600, that will be great!

KenjiS wrote in post #18130627
I'd get the 22 f/2 and the 28mm Macro..

Definitely the 28mm macro...

Beyond that? Nothing. The rest of the lenses are just not interesting.. Sure i can use my EF lenses on it but those are just for different things

Thats the sad thing, love the 28mm macro, like seriously, but theres a severe lack of lenses for the Canon EF-M system, Canon NEEDS a 35 f/1.8 and a 50 f/1.8

One reason i really like Micro 4/3.. Consider for similar size to the 18-55 you can get the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8.. Really comparing to APS-C Micro 4/3 doesnt come out "short" in its isolation capability.. Lenses like the 12-35 and 35-100 Panasonic are the size of the typical APS-C kit lens (18-55 55-250) but isolate like a constant f/4 on APS-C. I have a pocketable macro lens in the 45mm f/2.8 Macro-Elmar. My 15mm f/1.7 fits in my pocket too... in terms of DoF im not that far off of the EF-M 22mm either mind you...(f/3.2 equivalent vs f/3.4 equivalent..Do you really think theres a difference there?)

Im looking at one of the earlier M's with a 22mm it seems an ideal compromise between size and performance with an angle of view I can work well with. Lens wise though I find myself using less and less and looking at cameras more as a complete unit with the chance that the back may be upgraded some time. The rest of the M range of lenses apart from maybe the 15-45 don't appeal but working wise primes seem to be my most natural way of working and then either 35 or 50.

The specs say SD, SDHC, SDXC (UHS-1 compatible), will the camera still take the SDXC UHS II ??

Looks like Rocinkon is releasing a cool lens for the EF-M Mount!

https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …35mm_f1_2_high_​speed.html