EOS-M, is the AF as bad as the reviews say it is ?
Discussion
I’ve been dabbling with this Canon DSLR malarkey for about 6 years now – and after much buying and selling of lenses I’ve finally arrived at collection of lenses that for APS-C at least, I’m really, really happy with (10-22, 17-55, 70-300L, 35/2, 85/1.8, 18-55IS). I’ve got a 7D and a 400D that I use these with – I take the 400D when I want a smaller, lighter, less valuable camera for which it’s generally works out fine but it’s getting a bit long in the tooth and compared to the newer EOSs and I increasingly find the high ISO performance limiting.
I also have an S100 that goes everywhere with me that I’m also really happy with. I generally don’t touch the zoom and use it at it’s 24mm equivalent where it’s f/2 wide open .
For my last holiday I decided that even though I intended to use my S100 the majority of the time, I really wanted to take my 10-22 and 35/2 even though I suspected I’d only use them rarely. This indeed proved to be the case and whilst I was very pleased to have my lenses with me, dragging an SLR body half way round the world for 50 shots was a pain.
As such, I was eagerly awaiting the launch of Canon’s mirrorless camera and the initial specs of the EOS-M looked like just what I needed – with the new EF-M 20/2 it would still be compact enough to carry around in a belt pouch but with the EF adaptor could mount any of my EF or EF-S lenses if needed. I appreciate that the ergonomics of a big lens with a tiny camera wouldn’t be ideal – but I could live with that. Much to my disappointment the reviews all slate the camera on the basis of its AF performance, which some reviewers say make it virtually unusable particularly when using EF/EF-S lenses with the adapter.
I don’t expect or need the AF to be as lightening fast as my 7D, if it was good as the S100 I think I could live with it – but with the demise of Jessops and Jacabos, I’ve got nowhere to go to actually try one for my myself.
So my question to the forum is does anyone either own or has used an EOS-M ? And is the AF as bad as the reviews say ?
I also have an S100 that goes everywhere with me that I’m also really happy with. I generally don’t touch the zoom and use it at it’s 24mm equivalent where it’s f/2 wide open .
For my last holiday I decided that even though I intended to use my S100 the majority of the time, I really wanted to take my 10-22 and 35/2 even though I suspected I’d only use them rarely. This indeed proved to be the case and whilst I was very pleased to have my lenses with me, dragging an SLR body half way round the world for 50 shots was a pain.
As such, I was eagerly awaiting the launch of Canon’s mirrorless camera and the initial specs of the EOS-M looked like just what I needed – with the new EF-M 20/2 it would still be compact enough to carry around in a belt pouch but with the EF adaptor could mount any of my EF or EF-S lenses if needed. I appreciate that the ergonomics of a big lens with a tiny camera wouldn’t be ideal – but I could live with that. Much to my disappointment the reviews all slate the camera on the basis of its AF performance, which some reviewers say make it virtually unusable particularly when using EF/EF-S lenses with the adapter.
I don’t expect or need the AF to be as lightening fast as my 7D, if it was good as the S100 I think I could live with it – but with the demise of Jessops and Jacabos, I’ve got nowhere to go to actually try one for my myself.
So my question to the forum is does anyone either own or has used an EOS-M ? And is the AF as bad as the reviews say ?
For static subjects in OK light its fine.
I tried shooting my 400 on the beach with it...
Birds - no chance.
Surfer - tricky, issue was the af point is large and grabs the wrong thing and takes -12 seconds to lock so fires when you dont want it.
Kids/dogs - not great either but possible.
Out at a pub later in low light and with the 18-55 ef-m and 50mmf1.4 sigma ...
Terrible. several seconds to attempt lock even with its hideously obnoxious af assist light. Missed EVERY moment. Useless here.
It falls into a hole, sensor is too big, lenses are too fast for just not caring about af (s100 can just roughly af and fire the flash, lots of dof).
All the above was after taking it out in a backpack mountainbiking and shooting this. two sides of a coin!
Storm over Heathcote by robjdickinson, on Flickr
I tried shooting my 400 on the beach with it...
Birds - no chance.
Surfer - tricky, issue was the af point is large and grabs the wrong thing and takes -12 seconds to lock so fires when you dont want it.
Kids/dogs - not great either but possible.
Out at a pub later in low light and with the 18-55 ef-m and 50mmf1.4 sigma ...
Terrible. several seconds to attempt lock even with its hideously obnoxious af assist light. Missed EVERY moment. Useless here.
It falls into a hole, sensor is too big, lenses are too fast for just not caring about af (s100 can just roughly af and fire the flash, lots of dof).
All the above was after taking it out in a backpack mountainbiking and shooting this. two sides of a coin!
Storm over Heathcote by robjdickinson, on Flickr
Thank you all.
Rob's comments that he struggled to use the camera effectively in a casual social setting are worrying - I think that would be a deal breaker for me.
I do get it that even though my S100 is f/2 at the wide end with a full frame equivalent focal length of 24mm - its actual focal length at the wide end is 5.2mm and the sensor is a quarter of the size of APS-C, so even its shallowest depth of field is actually pretty deep and as such it can still pitch a pretty inaccurate AF system and still produce sharp images - which the EOS-M with it's bigger sensor and longer actual focal length lenses wouldn't be able to get away with. There does seem to be a strong consensus that Canon lags Olympus and Panasonic considerably in phase detect AF though, which is a shame as I'd really like to be able to leverege my existing Canon lenses.
I did see the EOS 100d announcement last week and I think that would be worth looking at. What I really want though is 1 camera to travel with that can live in my pocket or in a belt pouch everywhere I go with a small fastish, wideish lens - but be able to mount my other lenses when needed. At a push the 100d might do this with the 40/2.8 pancake but I don't think I'd find that wide enough. As I understand it 40mm is the shortest focal length possible for a simple pancake design given the constraints of the sensor/mount dimensions, so no change of a wider EF/EF-S pancake - so I'd still end up wandering around with a DSLR, albeit a small one, on a strap around my neck when I went somewhere other than for the express purpose of taking pictures, which is what I'm trying to avoid (Dad why do you have to wear that thing everythwere - you look such a pratt!).
The EOS M with the 22/2 EF-M lens and EF/EF-S convertor would have been the best of both worlds and exactly what I wanted - shame.
Rob's comments that he struggled to use the camera effectively in a casual social setting are worrying - I think that would be a deal breaker for me.
I do get it that even though my S100 is f/2 at the wide end with a full frame equivalent focal length of 24mm - its actual focal length at the wide end is 5.2mm and the sensor is a quarter of the size of APS-C, so even its shallowest depth of field is actually pretty deep and as such it can still pitch a pretty inaccurate AF system and still produce sharp images - which the EOS-M with it's bigger sensor and longer actual focal length lenses wouldn't be able to get away with. There does seem to be a strong consensus that Canon lags Olympus and Panasonic considerably in phase detect AF though, which is a shame as I'd really like to be able to leverege my existing Canon lenses.
I did see the EOS 100d announcement last week and I think that would be worth looking at. What I really want though is 1 camera to travel with that can live in my pocket or in a belt pouch everywhere I go with a small fastish, wideish lens - but be able to mount my other lenses when needed. At a push the 100d might do this with the 40/2.8 pancake but I don't think I'd find that wide enough. As I understand it 40mm is the shortest focal length possible for a simple pancake design given the constraints of the sensor/mount dimensions, so no change of a wider EF/EF-S pancake - so I'd still end up wandering around with a DSLR, albeit a small one, on a strap around my neck when I went somewhere other than for the express purpose of taking pictures, which is what I'm trying to avoid (Dad why do you have to wear that thing everythwere - you look such a pratt!).
The EOS M with the 22/2 EF-M lens and EF/EF-S convertor would have been the best of both worlds and exactly what I wanted - shame.
Edited by Seight_Returns on Wednesday 27th March 16:58
So I finally got to play with one - and much to my surprise I found the AF speed to be perfectly acceptable. For sure it's no action camera, but for what I want it for - a compact travel camera to complement my 7D with the ability to mount any of my EF/EF-S lenses when required, I think it will do the job just fine.
One subsequent question though - I've only played with an M with the 18-55 STM lens attached - is the AF performance noticeably worse when using EF/EF-S lenses via the adapter ?
One subsequent question though - I've only played with an M with the 18-55 STM lens attached - is the AF performance noticeably worse when using EF/EF-S lenses via the adapter ?
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff