New Canon EOS M5 Mirrorless

Sir_Loin wrote in post #18150568
While we all know the Canon mirrorless cameras are still lagging behind in their capabilities against the likes of Sony and Olympus for example, the Canon M3 and M5 are still very good cameras! If you want to use your existing Canon lens collection and keep the familiarity of the EOS system in a compact set up they are perfect!

I bought a M3 a few months ago for the very reasons I stated above and even though I was a little sceptical of its abilities, I gave it a thorough workout when I went around Spain and France with my family this summer and it never skipped a beat and the image quality is quite superb. Give it a few months after launch so the price comes down from its MRRP and I'll probably get a M5, that's how happy I am with how far Canon have come with their mirrorless system.

Horses for courses I suppose, but I really do wonder if all these people who keep slating Canon would actually need/use/miss some of these functions that are 'missing' from their mirrorless models?

I think for anyone looking for a mirrorless camera as their main system there are better options than the Canon M series cameras, but for anyone already invested in the Canon system looking for a portable alternative to take on holiday etc I think the M5 will be good. I've had the M3 for over a year and yes you do need to work it but the quality is good and the lenses are nowhere near as poor as people make out. I haven't seen anyone who actually has the camera and EF-M lenses complain about them, it is always people who don't have them who think they are not fast enough.

I have always had a bit of a gripe about peoples video expectations, they should probably buy a video camera if it really matters that much to them. I would imagine the majority of videos only go on facebook anyway, why the need for 4K for that, and are people watching the videos on something that takes advantage of the 4K resolution. Anyone doing anything more serious already knows they need a dedicated video setup. I'm sure this time next year it will be 8K or 16K everyone is 'lacking'.

I might be wrong about what people do with their videos, but I see the M5/M3 as a holiday or day-out camera, the one you keep in the car or the one you take when you don't want to shove a 1DX in someones face. And for that I am sure it will be brilliant.

Sir_Loin wrote in post #18150568
While we all know the Canon mirrorless cameras are still lagging behind in their capabilities against the likes of Sony and Olympus for example, the Canon M3 and M5 are still very good cameras! If you want to use your existing Canon lens collection and keep the familiarity of the EOS system in a compact set up they are perfect!

Horses for courses I suppose, but I really do wonder if all these people who keep slating Canon would actually need/use/miss some of these functions that are 'missing' from their mirrorless models?

i After holding the X Pro1 with the XF lens attached, I want a similarly small set up. To have a fast lens I would need an M/EOS adapter.


ii You're probably right, but no one wants to buy something dated to the competition. Canon is the big player here, they choose what to include, and what to leave out.

thc1979 wrote in post #18150580
it is always people who don't have them who think they are not fast enough.

This is where I feel I got burned by the Fuji X Pro1. I knew it had slow AF, everyone was stating that. I could have dealt with that. It was the completely unreliable AF that did it for me. Good light, static objects with high contrast and it would lock on and miss focus by a mile.


This has made me listen to the doubters..........

BUT. I really do want to like the M5. I've still got my EF-S 17-55/2.8 and Sigma 10-20 amongst others which would make life easier for me. If I have to sell them and start again though, so be it..........

h14nha wrote in post #18150596
This is where I feel I got burned by the Fuji X Pro1. I knew it had slow AF, everyone was stating that. I could have dealt with that. It was the completely unreliable AF that did it for me. Good light, static objects with high contrast and it would lock on and miss focus by a mile.

This has made me listen to the doubters..........

BUT. I really do want to like the M5. I've still got my EF-S 17-55/2.8 and Sigma 10-20 amongst others which would make life easier for me. If I have to sell them and start again though, so be it..........

I meant slow lenses (ie f/3.5 max) not slow AF, apparently that's ok on the M5 but we'll see! M3 wasn't good at moving objects!

h14nha wrote in post #18150559
It looks like it will be fairly expensive £1500 ish, but, 4K video, proper IBIS, huge buffer, touch screen. The outgoing A6300 still looks better on paper than the yet to be released M5. I get your point about fast release dates, but they are pushing the boundaries so fast they are not incremental changes. I mean, has anyone seen the JPEG buffer, its amazing.
https://youtu.be/FMn4d​kLVNxg

Petapixel reported the price as $1400 for the A6500 but the A6300 is the same price as the M5.
Funnily enough, I feel like upgrading a camera after 1 year for the price we pay would be too fast and too expensive but many of us so the same and phones are becoming around the same price (at least here in AUS they are).

If I was looking for a mirrorless body to back up my 6D I'd still go for the M5 over the A6300/A6500.

h14nha wrote in post #18150559
It looks like it will be fairly expensive £1500 ish, but, 4K video, proper IBIS, huge buffer, touch screen. The outgoing A6300 still looks better on paper than the yet to be released M5. I get your point about fast release dates, but they are pushing the boundaries so fast they are not incremental changes. I mean, has anyone seen the JPEG buffer, its amazing.
https://youtu.be/FMn4d​kLVNxg

Thats the exact reason for my hesitance in getting a new body as stated above. Canon announce the 5D4 and Sony up the ante with the A99ii. Enter the M5 and along comes the A6500 and blows it out of the water. Sony were HUGELY criticised on these boards about the lack of a lens line-up, now 2/3 years later and they have a superb lins selection. In the same time frame, Canon has sat on their butt with the M mount.

The problem with that comparison is that the new Sony is 43% more expensive than the M5 but not 43% more camera to me. If the lens options were better for the M5 I would comfortably say I'd rather have it.

The A99 vs 5D4 is different. We'll see how the A99 actually holds up, but it looks better spec'd and cheaper than the 5D4.

Whether any of the other supposed Sony rumors hold up (overheating, fiddly controls) I don't know, but just on paper the new A99 would appear to offer a better value proposition than the new 5. I'm not sure how current Sony has kept their full frame mount lens lineup though.

Lets see... few more weeks it should hit the market and the reviews should be coming in... will be fun to watch!

Between Sony, Canon, Fuji etc. My head is spinning trying to pick a mirrorless system.

Tommydigi wrote in post #18150750
Between Sony, Canon, Fuji etc. My head is spinning trying to pick a mirrorless system.

I agree with all the previous posts, people are being fair in their analysis of all systems.

This is why, like Tommy my head is spinning too.

The trouble is, the last few years all my local camera shops have closed. I was a faithful customer to them, shunning on-line prices to have the great customer service they provided. Unfortunately they closed anyway and now I don't really have anywhere to go to test out new products.

Despite all my reservations, something is pulling me to the M5 anyway.


I worked for Sony locally for 11 years and still have people there who I can get staff discounts for me. But, I went to my sisters last Sunday and saw her husband's A7S + 24-70GM - it's freaking HUGE HUGE, I glanced and thought he had a 70-300 on it. Its about the size I remember the Canon 70-200/4 to be. It has great reviews but isn't a compact system anymore.


I love love the look of the XT-1 Graphite which is a lot of camera for bargain basement money at present. I have the 18/35 combo for that, small and fast lens.

I'm also leaning to an XT-1 for the same reason ( if I ever even get a mirrorless ) I've been looking at these for some time and I never convince myself to pull the trigger but I do want to try it out without spending top dollar and the Fuji seems like its the most fun to use.

Sir_Loin wrote in post #18150568
While we all know the Canon mirrorless cameras are still lagging behind in their capabilities against the likes of Sony and Olympus for example, the Canon M3 and M5 are still very good cameras! If you want to use your existing Canon lens collection and keep the familiarity of the EOS system in a compact set up they are perfect!

I bought a M3 a few months ago for the very reasons I stated above and even though I was a little sceptical of its abilities, I gave it a thorough workout when I went around Spain and France with my family this summer and it never skipped a beat and the image quality is quite superb. Give it a few months after launch so the price comes down from its MRRP and I'll probably get a M5, that's how happy I am with how far Canon have come with their mirrorless system.

Horses for courses I suppose, but I really do wonder if all these people who keep slating Canon would actually need/use/miss some of these functions that are 'missing' from their mirrorless models?

FYI, the A6300/A7ii/A7rii and newer models can already AF with canon lenses, and offer face detection/tracking in phase detect. Some sigma lenses have full functionality like lock on AF and eyeball focus using sigma's special adapter.

Some caviats
1. cheap adapter.... works only with newer lenses, I had a spare cheap adapter, not worth selling, permanently mounted on the 24-70ii.
2. Metabones = $400, Sigma MC-11 = $250, ND throttle fusion (built in variable ND + electronics = killer for landscape shooters) $250, Techart pro Leica AF adapter (allows MF of virtually any MF lens as well) = $350. Comlite nikon adapter = $400, Sony LA-EA3 = ?$99

out of those prices, sony adapter looks like the most reasonable price wise, and third party tends to cost more!
3. The sony way, the system is way different, but once you learn it, definitely a lot to like, YMMV.

The sony system can AF any lens ever made with the right adapter, it's the curse of having TOO many options. If you use sony for strictly landscapes and with canon lenses, the ND throttle is drool worthy. Built in ND that can work with any lens, including the 11-24, which doesnt do front filters well. The rear filter works similar to a gel and doesnt have issues that front variable ND's run into. Simply change lenses and you've got a variable ND up to 8 stops, and you can simulate further with LE simulation in an APP.

seriously, if you go into the fredmiranda forums, those guys run into the curse of paralysis by analysis, TOO many lens options between canon, native, and leica mount. There's lengthy debates on CY vs Canon vs Sony GM zooms, Zeiss leica mount primes vs anything, it gets kind of nuts there, and those guys have way too big of a budget for me to consider.

I love the choices, but money can deplete extremely fast if you play with leica stuff.......

some canon lenses I bought specifically to shoot with sony include: 24-70ii, 100 f2, 135 f2, all stabilized ahhhhhh Granted, I hardly use these canon lenses because I like shooting lightweight with the 10/35/50mm lenses.

The good thing about the EOS-M is pure simplicity, I can give to my wife or kid and they can use it. I really wish it had USB charging though, I hate having to find chargers on vacation (and in general) and rarely if ever charge the battery with it's own charger. You can find usb chargers anywhere in the world or connect to laptop. I dont even know where my charger is for my sony, but with the M, I gotta remember where it is, a real hassle.

Charlie, do you have the Voightlander 10? Those lenses keep the A7RII on my radar and make pulling the trigger on APS-C mirrorless harder to do. uggg, I guess its a good time with so many options but no clear choice at all.

h14nha wrote in post #18150821
Despite all my reservations, something is pulling me to the M5 anyway.


I worked for Sony locally for 11 years and still have people there who I can get staff discounts for me. But, I went to my sisters last Sunday and saw her husband's A7S + 24-70GM - it's freaking HUGE HUGE, I glanced and thought he had a 70-300 on it. Its about the size I remember the Canon 70-200/4 to be. It has great reviews but isn't a compact system anymore.


I love love the look of the XT-1 Graphite which is a lot of camera for bargain basement money at present. I have the 18/35 combo for that, small and fast lens.

another curse of having too many options

I completely understand the size issue of the GM, and people are simply compelled to shoot with 2.8 zooms, the allure is too much for many to contain. It wouldnt feel right for me to have a slower main zoom, I'm ok with my telephoto be slow though.

I do struggle with size issues, and really a curse of being a pixel peeper. If I can settle for the 24-70 f4, which gives better results than anything APS-C, it's only 400 grams, fitting for a small system.

FE 70-300. IMO, it's a small lens. Compare it to the equivalent Canon L version, and it's 200 grams lighter and an inch shorter. That's pretty substantial. I can carry it in similar bags as the 24-70ii adapted. I have fairly strict requirements on size due to my bags being small. A 70-200/70-300L cannot fit my bags.

FE 35 vs M 22.... the FE 35 on FF produces substantially better IQ, and similar size to the 22. It's a stop slower, but the body + ibis more than makes up for the difference.

FE 50, DSLR design believe it or not, like canon's nifty fifty, but better IQ wide open, and much better bokeh. It's like a mini L lens if you ask me. Also have the FE 55, but I like this more (i'm in the minority on this subject).

CV 10 5.6, absolutely amazing imo, shockingly good, better than the 11-24 @11 imo. size is perfect, small and dense.

OM 200.... well it's a 200mm under 400g, needs a lot of light, MF. IQ is what you expect from a prime (always have this on a hike, and use this more often than my AF alternative).

This set of lenses is my most used kit, and I'm prepping to go shoot tonight for a function my son is a part of. He's going to be shooting with the EOS-M, and I with the A7rii + 50mm. I might bring the 100f2 for some portraits, or just use the 50 for that

all these lenses have something in common, they can resolve extremely high amounts of detail.

it's a blessing and a curse having a big and small kit. Really the curse of having too many options. Sometimes I say screw it, and take the 24-70 and nothing else. Sometimes, I take the 35 and nothing else, sometimes 50. I'de say I use the 35 slightly more than 50, and both 9:1 more than the 24-70/70-300. Weight and size are a burden when walking around with a stroller and my kids. If I didnt have a baby, I think I'de be ok carrying the 24-70 more tbh. It's a good lens, AF snappy, 2.8 is a good amount of light considering 25600 isnt that bad https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18149373

I'm always interested in canon lens improvements for that reason, it could very well be my next lens.

Tommydigi wrote in post #18150857
Charlie, do you have the Voightlander 10? Those lenses keep the A7RII on my radar and make pulling the trigger on APS-C mirrorless harder to do. uggg, I guess its a good time with so many options but no clear choice at all.

sorry missed this, and yes I have the CV 10. Simply amazing

samples buried in this fire of a thread:

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18096342
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18140559
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18141277