# 40mm 'Pancake' and the Eos M...a perfect match...see my review



## Ivan Muller (Aug 1, 2013)

Well I have had the 40mm pancake for a while now and after the 22mm it is my most favorite lens for the Eos M. The last three days I have photographed exclusively with this lens and the Eos M and I actually got to like it a lot and it could almost become my second 'standard' lens! To see more images and my thoughts on this lens please visit my blog here at...http://thelazytravelphotographer.blogspot.com/2013/08/canon-eos-m-ef-40mm-f28-stm-pancake.html


----------



## bholliman (Aug 1, 2013)

Nice review! The 40mm looks like a great option for the EOS-M.

I have been using my EF 50 1.4 with my EOS-M recently (80mm 2.2 FF equivalent) and it makes a very nice portrait lens, but is a little bulky and heavy for the body. With the 40mm's tiny size it does not have that issue.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Aug 1, 2013)

Another nice review, Ivan. Some nice images that are well presented. Keep sharing them!

I am looking forward to documenting my experiences with some legacy glass, and have both a M42-EF-M adapter coming along with a Konica AR adapter for a nice looking copy of the Konica Hexanon AR 50mm f/1.7 that I recently got and haven't been able to use yet.


----------



## distant.star (Aug 1, 2013)

.
Thanks, Ivan.

I always enjoy your pictures and thoughts on the technical stuff.


----------



## Ivan Muller (Aug 1, 2013)

bholliman said:


> Nice review! The 40mm looks like a great option for the EOS-M.
> 
> I have been using my EF 50 1.4 with my EOS-M recently (80mm 2.2 FF equivalent) and it makes a very nice portrait lens, but is a little bulky and heavy for the body. With the 40mm's tiny size it does not have that issue.



thanks! I have the 50mm f1.8...but I havent tried it with the Eos M yet..( .I gave it to my daughter partnered with my old 20D), the build quality is not even close but being mostly plastic should be lightweight...maybe I will review that next....


----------



## Ivan Muller (Aug 1, 2013)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Another nice review, Ivan. Some nice images that are well presented. Keep sharing them!
> 
> I am looking forward to documenting my experiences with some legacy glass, and have both a M42-EF-M adapter coming along with a Konica AR adapter for a nice looking copy of the Konica Hexanon AR 50mm f/1.7 that I recently got and haven't been able to use yet.



Thanks Dustin! I have only tried manual focus with a tripod...and then of course its quite easy...but I haven't explored hand held MF with the Eos M yet....my MF lenses are all shift and tilt...I would like to hear your experiences with the Hexanon lens. BTW I still have a Konica Hexar camera with a fixed 35mm f2 lens!


----------



## sdsr (Aug 1, 2013)

That's a nice review, and yes, one can certainly make nice images with it. That said, a couple of your comments remind me of its drawbacks. As you say, this camera - like other small cameras - seems designed for those who want to be "always ready for a quick 'grab' shot". And not just professionals like you, but (mostly, I suspect) casual customers who think DSRLs and other cameras with lots of visible controls are too big/complicated/hard to use/expensive. 

Ironically, though, it seems to me that it's far harder to take a good "quick grab shot" with an EOS-M than it is with a DSLR. Why? First, unless the subject is large, accurate focus takes a fair amount of time. The M's focus box is far too big for smallish subjects (especially if you're attempting selective shallow focus) and, unlike M43 cameras (and others), you can't make it smaller and stay smaller from shot to shot; instead you have to use the magnify box separately for each photo. While this usually results in accurate focus (but not always - sometimes the camera has flatly refused to focus at all for me, even when the subject filled the magnified box), the process is far removed from taking a "quick grab shot"; what takes a couple of seconds on a DSLR or OM-D takes much longer on the M. 

Second, and related, as you say IS is more important with cameras that don't have a viewfinder; all lenses would benefit from it and, as Panasonic has come to realize with its latest M43 bodies, it should be in the body. So you have to be extra-careful when holding the camera. 

Third (this matters less to me) the camera is just slow to use - not only does establishing focus take longer, but there's quite a lag between when you've taken a shot and when it will let you take the next one (write time? maybe it's shorter if you don't shoot RAW, but I'm not interested in that); photographing action must be rather frustrating, street-shooting maddening unless you're happy with narrow apertures that get everything in focus. 

Maybe I'm just not sufficiently accustomed to using it, but it seems to me that the convenience of its small size and weight comes at the expense of inconvenience of use. Considering that my OM-D doesn't have a comparable expense and, given the tiny size of M43 lenses, weighs even less, I'm not sure I'll be keeping my M.


----------



## JPAZ (Aug 1, 2013)

All of the above is of note. Nice review. First of all, and +1 on the 40mm. With the adapter, it is my second "M prime" and is not too big or bulky. The photos are great.

I also, in many ways, agree with sdsr. But, this reflects (wow, a pun!) the limitations of the Eos-M, in general. However, I have my M with my 22 in a leather case sitting next to a Mirrorless Mover 10 with the adapter / 40mm and the 18-55M (along with a spare battery and the charger) as my small kit. This is light and small and that's the whole idea. It is sitting on a shelf next to my 5Diii with two lenses in a Retrospective 7, and the difference is remarkable. The camera is what it is. But now I have the ability to grab my big stuff (no doubt it is so much more capable and versatile) or my little kit and go. It is a nice option.

JP


----------



## Ivan Muller (Aug 2, 2013)

sdsr said:


> That's a nice review, and yes, one can certainly make nice images with it. That said, a couple of your comments remind me of its drawbacks. As you say, this camera - like other small cameras - seems designed for those who want to be "always ready for a quick 'grab' shot". And not just professionals like you, but (mostly, I suspect) casual customers who think DSRLs and other cameras with lots of visible controls are too big/complicated/hard to use/expensive.
> 
> Ironically, though, it seems to me that it's far harder to take a good "quick grab shot" with an EOS-M than it is with a DSLR. Why? First, unless the subject is large, accurate focus takes a fair amount of time. The M's focus box is far too big for smallish subjects (especially if you're attempting selective shallow focus) and, unlike M43 cameras (and others), you can't make it smaller and stay smaller from shot to shot; instead you have to use the magnify box separately for each photo. While this usually results in accurate focus (but not always - sometimes the camera has flatly refused to focus at all for me, even when the subject filled the magnified box), the process is far removed from taking a "quick grab shot"; what takes a couple of seconds on a DSLR or OM-D takes much longer on the M.
> 
> ...




SDSR, Yes of course all your points are valid for your style of shooting. Not taking its price into account and for a street shooter there are obviously better cameras out there.

I don't really do 'street' as we understand it but rather 'street portraits'. So an ultra fast AF is not that important for me. For fast Af I have a 5D2. In fact for me one of the best 'street' cameras out there would be the Leica X series. They have agonizingly slow AF but one brilliant redeeming feature which is a super easy 'zone focus' capability. Set up like that focus becomes a non issue...but then as you said you don't like narrow apertures. I on the other do like narrow apertures, so for me it would work perfectly.

I bought the Eos M purely as a backup camera for my 5D2. I tested the Af instore, and that's before the firmware update, and felt I could live with it. After the firmware update I am more than happy with it. So much so that I have decided to wait and see what the next Eos M looks like before committing to my other 'dream' camera, the Fuji X100s. The Eos M 'slow' AF is now a non issue for 90% of my images. Perhaps two and a half years with the even slower X1 has taught me to anticipate a bit more than most with more responsive cameras

But now that I have the Eos M I realize it is not half as bad as the press made it out to be, and with a little bit of work and foresight it can be a great little camera.

As for getting a 'quick grab shot' I think its eminently suitable for that because I have it with me all the time, precisely because its so small and because I also have an OVF for it. The Af is fast enough that I am more than confident of getting that grab shot when it arises...obviously your shooting style needs something different.

Yes it is slower from shot to shot than my dslr, but then when I expect 'action' then I put it on continuous and bang of a few...it works for me but obviously might not work for someone else...

For me its great strengths are compatibility with the rest of my Canon system and thus a good backup. Price..I got mine with the 22mm lens, lens adapter and flash for less than half the price of the fuji X100s. Size - I carry it with me everyday...and the better than expected image quality, but it requires careful processing. for my style of shooting it really is a almost perfect solution.

If I didn't have a Canon DSLR and wanted a small compact high quality and very responsive camera I would certainly have looked at the OMD and a few others. But I just don't like having too many different brands on hand and thus for me the Eos M has been a very good buy. I expected worse and actually got a lot more...And not being able financially to buy and sell cameras when they dont suit me perfectly I have to make them 'work' and bend their will until it fits in with mine... 

And yes I wish Canon would have in body IS, it just makes a lot of sense! And I also wish a Leica MM was a lot cheaper!

Enclosed an image that illustrates my point. I saw that this guy was going to ride past me on the pavement. I just lifted my camera and waited for the 'action' to happen, my camera was set on continuous and I just let rip as he entered the frame. I would do the same for a 'street' shot as well...


----------



## Ivan Muller (Aug 2, 2013)

JPAZ said:


> All of the above is of note. Nice review. First of all, and +1 on the 40mm. With the adapter, it is my second "M prime" and is not too big or bulky. The photos are great.
> 
> But now I have the ability to grab my big stuff (no doubt it is so much more capable and versatile) or my little kit and go. It is a nice option.
> 
> JP



Thanks! and yes it IS a nice option.


----------



## drjlo (Aug 3, 2013)

I don't know. I tried the 40 mm with adapter, and f/2.8 just isn't fast enough for my tastes for portraits. 22 mm f/2 is a great little lens that's sharp and punchy, but at 22 mm, f/2 isn't exactly a bokeh monster, either. 

My 50L and 85L produces great bokeh on EOS-M, but they are simply too large, defeating the purpose my EOS-M for me, which I use for informal outings. Rather than the EF-M 18-55 for EF-M 11-22, I really wish there was a good f/1.8 EF-M lens somewhere between 35mm to 50mm range..


----------



## bholliman (Aug 3, 2013)

drjlo said:


> I really wish there was a good f/1.8 EF-M lens somewhere between 35mm to 50mm range..



+1. I would buy an EF-M 50 1.8 in a heartbeat!


----------



## bainsybike (Aug 3, 2013)

Fwiw, I've discovered that you can update the firmware of the 40mm lens with the M, at least with the Canon adapter fitted, although the M isn't listed by Canon as one of the qualifying cameras.


----------

