# M5 As Supplement to 5D3?



## Ed V (Dec 22, 2016)

I am primarily a street photog pushing 70. I have been primarily a Canon shooter except for a three year hiatus with Leica. About a year ago I sold all my Leica gear and came back to Canon with a 5D3 and 35, 50, 85 and 135 L-glass. 

What does this have to do with the M5? Sometimes the 5D3 and L-glass gets heavy for me to carry around all day. (I have back problems.) So I have been thinking mirrorless for a while now and after considering Fuji and Olympus, I think I have settled in on the M5 especially because I can use my Canon EF glass with the adapter. My question is for you folks using a 5D and M5... how do you view the M5 as a supplement for the 5D? Are you happy with it? Any regrets? And I am also concerned about the glass now available. How would you compare EF-M glass to available EF lenses both L and particularly non-L? I'd like to keep the entire unit light. Ultimately I would probably go with 35 full-frame equivalent for my street work until there is a solid 50 full-frame equivalent available. 

Thanks for your help.

Ed


----------



## slclick (Dec 22, 2016)

I'm interested in this setup as well. Years ago I tried the SL1 as a backup/2nd body but it failed me miserably in terms of image noise and how the ergonomics favored smaller hands. I'd like to see if the M5 has much cleaner images and how it works with the Sigma 50 Art and the135L in terms of AF, balance and portability.


----------



## bholliman (Dec 23, 2016)

I picked up a M5 to supplement my 5DsR. I had a 6D as a second camera until recently when I gave it to my oldest son, so was looking for a second body. I've owned a M1 for three years, but it never got a lot of use since its was only good for non-moving subjects.

The M5 has proven to be exactly what I was looking for to compliment my DSLR and heavy L lenses. I wanted something small and light that would be easy to carry around and not attract unwanted attention at times. The 5DsR is still my first choice when I want the best possible image quality or am shooting landscapes or wildlife. The 5D body fits my fairly large hands better and it easier to operate, maybe since I've been using it long enough I can do everything without looking.

The M5 will be my choice for family outings or day trips, times when I want to go light and photography will not be the primary reason for the outing. I've already used it for some elementary school activities and kids Christmas parties and its performed every bit as well as I hoped. My wife even commented that she was glad I was using a smaller "non-professional looking" camera. She often feels my DSLR equipment is too large and pretentious, so this is an added benefit.

I even tried it out with my 300 f/2.8 and 1.4x extender to shoot some birds at the bird feeder last weekend. The autofocus performed better than I expected and I got quite a few keepers. I don't see myself using it much for wildlife, but nice to know its capable.

The current EF-M lens lineup is pretty limited, but growing. I have the 15-45, 55-200 and 22 prime and just sold a 18-55 along with my M1 since I felt is was largely redundant. I've mostly been using the M5 indoors and the 22/2 is probably seeing the most usage along with my EF 50mmSTM mounted on an M adapter. These two make a nice 2 lens combo, with the 50STM and adapter still being small enough to be well matched with the rest of the kit.

I would love to see Canon come out with some additional primes and maybe some higher quality zooms if that's possible without getting too large. The zoom lenses currently available are all slow, but of course thats necessary to keep everything as small as possible. I can always hook on one of my EF lenses if I want something faster.


----------



## Pookie (Dec 23, 2016)

Ed V said:


> I am primarily a street photog pushing 70. I have been primarily a Canon shooter except for a three year hiatus with Leica. About a year ago I sold all my Leica gear and came back to Canon with a 5D3 and 35, 50, 85 and 135 L-glass.
> 
> What does this have to do with the M5? Sometimes the 5D3 and L-glass gets heavy for me to carry around all day. (I have back problems.) So I have been thinking mirrorless for a while now and after considering Fuji and Olympus, I think I have settled in on the M5 especially because I can use my Canon EF glass with the adapter. My question is for you folks using a 5D and M5... how do you view the M5 as a supplement for the 5D? Are you happy with it? Any regrets? And I am also concerned about the glass now available. How would you compare EF-M glass to available EF lenses both L and particularly non-L? I'd like to keep the entire unit light. Ultimately I would probably go with 35 full-frame equivalent for my street work until there is a solid 50 full-frame equivalent available.
> 
> ...



I'm interested as to why you dropped Leica... especially in the street photography realm? Was it eye sight issues?

I ask because I am heavily invested in many of the systems you mentioned. I own an extensive camera collection in Canon for business purposes (multiple 5D3's, 1DX and almost all lenses from 11mm to 200 including the f/2). I own quite a few Fuji cameras and lenses (now settling on the X-pro 2 for almost all my Fuji work with an extensive prime collection). With Leica; M240's, Safari, M6, M3, M5 and MP with mostly 21, 35 and 50's in multiple copies and flavors.

Of all three of these systems I prefer the Leica format for street with the Fuji system coming in as close second. As for focusing and eye sight I can understand the apprehension of a RF but I rarely use a few finder when shooting street with any Leica. The weight savings is huge. I'm not quite sold on EVF being better yet so I prefer Leica over Fuji but the Fuji's are sublime for the most part.

Between all three...Canon would come in as a far third compared to these choices. An M5 with an 85L is hardly any weight savings and is unwieldy compared to either Leica or Fuji. I have the M5 but it really is subpar in all most every respect compared to the Fuji. I know many Canonites here will guffaw but it's lagging where Fuji excels. I'm not a fanboy though as I like all cameras but holding all three in hand... the M5 would be hard a hard choice over the others.

Genuinely interested as to what Leica's you shot with and why you gave them up as I do feel they are the perfect street camera, in analog or digital. 

I will say this though... for street I carry either an M6 or 240 in 35mm or a Mamiya 7II. My personal faves for that type of work.


----------



## Ed V (Dec 23, 2016)

Well Pookie, eyesight had something to do with it. But it was more than that. I made a lot of really good photos with the Leica (photos that i exhibited in galleries and museum) but I also missed some as well. I never got totally comfortable with the totally manual operation. I'd focus and the subject would move slightly and I'd lose the focus. This happened particularly with street portraits I would make. I would not pose the person but rather engage them in conversation and take the shot when I felt the time was right. Most of the time it was just one or two shots. If they moved slightly and I was at say f/2.8, I would lose the focus. It's more involved than that but that kinda the reason behind it. As far as cameras, I used an m3, m6 and m9. Had Leica and CV 28, 35 and 50 lenses. Like you some multiple focal lengths. The only Leica I kept was a small X2.

When I returned to a Canon 5D, I just felt much more comfortable once again. My preference is for 50s and recently I have been taking the new 50 1.8 over the 50 1.2 simply because of weight.

As far as the M5, I really would not want to use my 35L or 50L lenses for street with it. That's why I think I would go with EF-M 22mm (35mm equivalent) and hope for a 35mm (~50mm equivalent) in the not too distant future. That said, I still haven't ruled out the Fuji or the Olympus. I do like Fuji's prime lens offering. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the Fuji X-T2 significantly heavier than the Canon M5? Yes lighter than the 5D3 with L glass but heavier than the M5? I will ultimately come to a decision in the next month. 

Ed


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 23, 2016)

Although the APS-C body is smaller, if you want L quality lenses, you are back to big again. I have a APS-C body, but keep turning back to my FF body because its so much better. 

Its all relative, I gave up my 1 series bodies for the light and easy to carry 5D MK III.

That said, I do have a G1X II, but the M5 is pretty much the same except for extra weight due to ILC, and higher price.


----------



## Pookie (Dec 23, 2016)

Ed V said:


> Well Pookie, eyesight had something to do with it. But it was more than that. I made a lot of really good photos with the Leica (photos that i exhibited in galleries and museum) but I also missed some as well. I never got totally comfortable with the totally manual operation. I'd focus and the subject would move slightly and I'd lose the focus. This happened particularly with street portraits I would make. I would not pose the person but rather engage them in conversation and take the shot when I felt the time was right. Most of the time it was just one or two shots. If they moved slightly and I was at say f/2.8, I would lose the focus. It's more involved than that but that kinda the reason behind it. As far as cameras, I used an m3, m6 and m9. Had Leica and CV 28, 35 and 50 lenses. Like you some multiple focal lengths. The only Leica I kept was a small X2.
> 
> When I returned to a Canon 5D, I just felt much more comfortable once again. My preference is for 50s and recently I have been taking the new 50 1.8 over the 50 1.2 simply because of weight.
> 
> ...



Well, I can understand those reason but when I shoot street and Leica I never shoot wide open aps... always f/5.6 and above and never miss these days with pre-focus or zone focusing. Even with kids running around I rarely miss now... mine are 3 and 4.5 so they move quite fast.

I don't use the X-T2 but have 2 X-pro 2s, X100S and 100T... the weight of those cameras is not an issue, at least for me. The M5 I put almost exclusively together with the 35L II, 50L, 85L and 135L and there is no doubt it defeat the small nature of that camera. At this point I am no longer investing in Canon products... if anything I have gone the opposite direction of you. Fuji and Leica... I have a pre-order in for Fuji new MF camera. Selling a lot of Canon glass and a Pentax 645z rig. Shooting a healthy mix of analog 120 and 135 for personal work and mostly digital for business. 

Best of luck on your journey and the new cams... Happy Holidays, David...


----------



## Sporgon (Dec 23, 2016)

Ed V said:


> As far as the M5, I really would not want to use my 35L or 50L lenses for street with it. That's why I think I would go with EF-M 22mm (35mm equivalent) and hope for a 35mm (~50mm equivalent) in the not too distant future. That said, I still haven't ruled out the Fuji or the Olympus. I do like Fuji's prime lens offering. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the Fuji X-T2 significantly heavier than the Canon M5? Yes lighter than the 5D3 with L glass but heavier than the M5? I will ultimately come to a decision in the next month.
> 
> Ed



I find the 40 pancake works real well on the M3. ( Via adapter of course). The 64 mm equivalent fov gives a pleasing result for people. It's also pretty sharp in the middle at f2.8 so you get around a 64 mil f4 dof, which when close is more than shallow enough for me.


----------



## slclick (Dec 23, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> Ed V said:
> 
> 
> > As far as the M5, I really would not want to use my 35L or 50L lenses for street with it. That's why I think I would go with EF-M 22mm (35mm equivalent) and hope for a 35mm (~50mm equivalent) in the not too distant future. That said, I still haven't ruled out the Fuji or the Olympus. I do like Fuji's prime lens offering. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the Fuji X-T2 significantly heavier than the Canon M5? Yes lighter than the 5D3 with L glass but heavier than the M5? I will ultimately come to a decision in the next month.
> ...


----------



## Rocky (Dec 23, 2016)

Pookie said:


> Well, I can understand those reason but when I shoot street and Leica I never shoot wide open aps... always f/5.6 and above and never miss these days with pre-focus or zone focusing. Even with kids running around I rarely miss now... mine are 3 and 4.5 so they move quite fast.


Since you are used for the zone focusing and manual Focusing, may I suggest you to try the Leica lens on your M5. 
I see that the definition of the 35/2 Summicron has better definition than the EF-M 22/2. I also use the 90/4 Elmar as my defecto 135mm on the M. Both give me excellent result even the lenses is almost 50 years old


----------



## Pookie (Dec 24, 2016)

Rocky said:


> Pookie said:
> 
> 
> > Well, I can understand those reason but when I shoot street and Leica I never shoot wide open aps... always f/5.6 and above and never miss these days with pre-focus or zone focusing. Even with kids running around I rarely miss now... mine are 3 and 4.5 so they move quite fast.
> ...



I have a Leica to M adapter... it works well but I'd rather use them on the Leicas since there is no real benefit to the M5 as opposed to sticking to the 240's.


----------



## Rocky (Dec 24, 2016)

Pookie said:


> Rocky said:
> 
> 
> > Pookie said:
> ...




You are absolutely right. I just suggest it for you to try it out for fun


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 24, 2016)

I'd seriously consider the 80D, as I've finally come to terms with its pros and cons, after going back and forth for over a month...

Look on cameradecisions or another similar site that provide excellent comparisons of dimensions. You'll see that the 80D does not have a lot more bulk than the M5 once you get a lens on there, especially if you are using smaller ef or ef-s lenses on the 80D.

Considering the Fuji X-T2, which has lots of great lenses to go with it, again, once you have a lens on, you don't gain a lot of compactness compared to the 80D. And, for example, the Fuji 50-140mm actually weighs slightly more than Canon's wonderful ef 70-200mm f/4 IS, though you do get an extra stop of light, and the sizes are very close.

Btw, I got the ef 70-200mm for from Canon refurb for less than half the price of the Fuji 50-140mm.

So...Since I have Canon lenses, and I wanted quick AF, and better IQ than the M5 (but maybe no quite as good as the X-T2), I went with the 80D for something lighter than FF. It really is nice with the ef-s 24mm f/2.8 pancake! Very small.

And the video features are wonderful--I don't care about 4K at all. The touchscreen, ergonomics, simpler controls, menus...All considered, I think I made the right choice instead of going to Fuji.

Note I did try a friend's X-T2, liked it, but still prefer the 80D's optical viewfinder over the Fuji's EVF.

And then, finally, I'm comfortable, happy, and familiar with Canon's repair service...

M5 Just doesn't look like it's there yet, based on reviews I've been reading--not with the very nimble 80D coming in so close in size and having more lenses to choose from without needing an adapter.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Dec 24, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> I'd seriously consider the 80D, as I've finally come to terms with its pros and cons, after going back and forth for over a month...
> 
> Look on cameradecisions or another similar site that provide excellent comparisons of dimensions. You'll see that the 80D does not have a lot more bulk than the M5 once you get a lens on there, especially if you are using smaller ef or ef-s lenses on the 80D.
> 
> ...


Glad to see you made peace with the 80D.

Remember to turn off automatic chromatic aberration correction, and add sharpness with plenty of moderation. We do not want outlines like pencil drawings, do we? :


----------



## ShootingStars (Dec 24, 2016)

The reason why someone would want the M5 is because they own 5D3 along with L lenses. Buying a Fuji or Leica means moving to an entirely different system, and I would never ever use these for professional picture usage. Having an M5 means options. I can get okay/good enough quality with the M lenses or when I want quality I can use the adapter with my current L lenses. No 80D means I don't have to worry about micro focus adjustment with lenses such as Sigma ART lenses. The M5 is the perfect outing camera, with DPAF for video and stills. I can go portable and when I want quality there's the adapter.

And there is definitely weight and size savings; see all those using the A7 with the GMaster lenses? Kinda the same ordeal but full frame. The M5 is better for those who own L lenses and FF camera like 6D or 5D3.



Pookie said:


> Ed V said:
> 
> 
> > I am primarily a street photog pushing 70. I have been primarily a Canon shooter except for a three year hiatus with Leica. About a year ago I sold all my Leica gear and came back to Canon with a 5D3 and 35, 50, 85 and 135 L-glass.
> ...


----------



## Pookie (Dec 24, 2016)

ShootingStars said:


> The reason why someone would want the M5 is because they own 5D3 along with L lenses. Buying a Fuji or Leica means moving to an entirely different system, and I would never ever use these for professional picture usage. Having an M5 means options. I can get okay/good enough quality with the M lenses or when I want quality I can use the adapter with my current L lenses. No 80D means I don't have to worry about micro focus adjustment with lenses such as Sigma ART lenses. The M5 is the perfect outing camera, with DPAF for video and stills. I can go portable and when I want quality there's the adapter.
> 
> And there is definitely weight and size savings; see all those using the A7 with the GMaster lenses? Kinda the same ordeal but full frame. The M5 is better for those who own L lenses and FF camera like 6D or 5D3.
> 
> ...



Ahh, the master of observation... didn't read that both the op and I have 5D3's and L's. Some people, I know hard to believe, have more than just Canon gear. The OP had Leica's and Canon. I own multiple brands... when considering the options at that point the M5 is a poor choice.


----------



## AlanF (Dec 24, 2016)

I am not going to argue with Pookie who uses 120 and 135 film and Leicas as well as digital. Having done my apprenticeship as a schoolboy 50 years ago setting up a darkroom under the stairs. and making contact prints from 120 film and then graduating to an enlarger, I do have fond memories of film. But, digital only for me now. For me, the M5 is a superb complement to my FF bodies, providing excellent APS-C quality, the same menu system as my Canon DSLRs and being able to use my EF lenses if required. Fuji might have some advantages, but the M5 is good enough for me, and that and compatibility are what count for me in the end, and "for me" is the phrase that determines what all of us decide.


----------



## dak723 (Dec 24, 2016)

Before making your decision, if possible try the M5 with adapter and L lenses. I just bought the M5 and adapter and I'm returning the adapter because I found it very uncomfortable to use the EF size lenses. There is very little room between the adapter and the grip. You may have a different opinion once you try it, but I would strongly recommend using the EF-M lenses with the M and not counting on using your FF lenses until you have actually tried them.

As for the size difference - that is a huge plus. It is unbelievable how small and light the entire package is when using the EF-M lenses. Someone recommended the 80D, which, in my opinion, would give you very little weight advantage over the 5D III. The M5 is less than half the weight of the 5D III.


----------



## Ed V (Dec 25, 2016)

I appreciate all the comments and thoughts. Here's the thing. I have the 50 1.2L. And 50mm is my preferred focal length for most of my street work. But In recent months I find myself going out with the 50 1.8 STM more often than the 50 1.2 solely because of the size and weight. I also have the 35 1.4L with 35mm being my second choice behind the 50. I have recently given serious thought to picking up a 35 2.0 again because of the size and weight. I have back problems and toting a 5D3 with one of those lenses can cause me problems when I am pounding the streets for 6-8 hours.

So when I look at the M5, I am hoping I can get away with/be satisfied with the M lenses. I would start with the 22mm (35mm FF equivalent) and hope very strongly that Canon comes out with a similar 35MM (~50mm FF equivalent) M lens. In the meantime I may be able to get away with the 40mm pancake on the EF adapter. 

As I write this I keep thinking how crazy it is that I have the L-glass and am looking at smaller, non-L alternatives. But we gotta do what we gotta do.

Merry Christmas all.

Ed


----------



## jeanluc (Dec 25, 2016)

I am using my M5 instead of my 5d4 right now due to weight/space on a family type trip.
So far, it's great. A lot more like using a dslr than my M3. Packing it plus all lenses is much, much easier.
The only thing I miss is being able to auto bracket more than three shots. 

The dslr form factor and evf are great.

I highly recommend it to augment ones FF system.


----------



## AlanF (Dec 25, 2016)

dak723 said:


> Before making your decision, if possible try the M5 with adapter and L lenses. I just bought the M5 and adapter and I'm returning the adapter because I found it very uncomfortable to use the EF size lenses. There is very little room between the adapter and the grip. You may have a different opinion once you try it, but I would strongly recommend using the EF-M lenses with the M and not counting on using your FF lenses until you have actually tried them.
> 
> As for the size difference - that is a huge plus. It is unbelievable how small and light the entire package is when using the EF-M lenses. Someone recommended the 80D, which, in my opinion, would give you very little weight advantage over the 5D III. The M5 is less than half the weight of the 5D III.



The adapter is perfect for EF-S lenses like the 55-250mm STM, which is a better lens than the EF-M 55-200mm at 200mm. I hate to say this, but at the centre, the 55-250mm at 200mm is as good as as the 70-200mm f/4 L IS and clearly outresolves it at its extra reach of 250mm.


----------



## Act444 (Dec 25, 2016)

AlanF said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Before making your decision, if possible try the M5 with adapter and L lenses. I just bought the M5 and adapter and I'm returning the adapter because I found it very uncomfortable to use the EF size lenses. There is very little room between the adapter and the grip. You may have a different opinion once you try it, but I would strongly recommend using the EF-M lenses with the M and not counting on using your FF lenses until you have actually tried them.
> ...



When I had it, I found the EF-S 55-250mm to be a surprisingly sharp lens, one of the best price/performance ratios in the Canon system, and can hold its own with some of the L's in that regard. Unfortunately the same cannot be said of the EF-M version, although I will say the size advantage is _significant_. Enough so to 1) JUST squeeze in with my M10 into a Dashpoint 30 case, whereas the SL1/55-250 needed a moderately-sized camera bag; 2) occasionally be the difference in meeting venue lens size requirements, etc. But it's not bad either - with some PP work, the IQ is still superior to what you'd get out of one of those "25x power zoom" cameras for example.


----------



## dak723 (Dec 25, 2016)

Ed V said:


> As I write this I keep thinking how crazy it is that I have the L-glass and am looking at smaller, non-L alternatives. But we gotta do what we gotta do.



Not crazy at all. Unless you are a person who prints large, most lenses are more than good enough. I sold my 24-105 L and replaced it with an older 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 bought on Ebay for about $70. IQ is about the same and I made a bunch of $$.


----------



## Ed V (Dec 25, 2016)

dak723 said:


> Ed V said:
> 
> 
> > As I write this I keep thinking how crazy it is that I have the L-glass and am looking at smaller, non-L alternatives. But we gotta do what we gotta do.
> ...



Depends how you define large. I routinely print up to 12"x18" and occasionally 16"x24". That's the limitation of my printer (Epson 3800). I have gone outside to make prints as large as 24"x36" for exhibitions. And truth be told, some of those photos were shot with a G1X and Ricoh GRDIV. So not all were the result of Canon L-glass or the Leica glass I had been using for a three year period.


----------



## slclick (Dec 25, 2016)

Well I've given up on the idea of the M5 as a backup since I'm springing for a 100-400 Mk 2 instead, lol.


----------



## JPAZ (Dec 25, 2016)

I had a pretty poor experience with the M1. But, I recently started using the M3 as a secondary body or backup to my 5Diii. I do have the EVF. I have not yet handled the M5 (I know the OP is asking about the M5) so take these comments in that context and I am not trying to hijack the thread.

My conclusion is that the M3 and EVF do just what the OP is asking so I suspect the M5 would as well. I use EF-M lenses 99% of the time but do have an adapter and given the investment in L glass in my bag, this is a nice option if I want.. There is no question that the IQ is pretty good in the right light and conditions, but this APS-C sensor has more noise and the DOF differences can be an issue compared to FF. To put it into perspective, on a recent trip to Ethiopia I used the FF most of the time but select M3 images (when I needed to carry a more compact setup) are almost indistinguishable from the FF photos. In contrast (no pun intended), a recent quick trip to NYC with just the M3 setup is notable for sensor noise but there were more lighting challenges needing a higher ISO.

So my thoughts to the question of the OP would be "yes" but........

JPAZ


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 25, 2016)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > I'd seriously consider the 80D, as I've finally come to terms with its pros and cons, after going back and forth for over a month...
> ...



Live and learn, stay open minded.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 25, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> So...Since I have Canon lenses, and I wanted quick AF, and better IQ than the M5 (but maybe no quite as good as the X-T2), I went with the 80D



Now, in what way does the 80D deliver *better IQ *than M5?


----------



## AlanF (Dec 25, 2016)

dak723 said:


> Ed V said:
> 
> 
> > As I write this I keep thinking how crazy it is that I have the L-glass and am looking at smaller, non-L alternatives. But we gotta do what we gotta do.
> ...



Not only printing large but also needing to crop. Sure, if you can fill the frame, most lenses deliver the goods. But, if you need to crop a small bird in the middle of the frame through a telephoto, then you need the sharpest lens you can get.


----------



## JoFT (Dec 30, 2016)

I would not see it as a supplement but as an add on. I just got mine. More or less as replacement for a 7DMkII (not 100% it will remain the matter of choice in sports and wildlife= as well as a Lumix GX80. Since 2009 I have a µ43 for traveling without my big stuff. And big mens 5DIII and today 5DiV. APS-C gives you more usage of your glass due to the crop. I was shooting today with the 35mm f1.4 L II: it´s awesome!


Bit for traveling my choice will be:

Rokinon 12mm f2.0
EFM 22mm f2.0
EFM 28mm f3.5 Makro
Zeiss Milvus 50mm f1.4
And perhaps the 55-200mm EFM Zoom.
This will be my always-with-me-emergency kit.


I can only recommend this little beast of camera. It is great. And the focusing is awesome. 


---and please forget the Sony stuff. It´s a hype - but no real reason to change. Seriously!


----------

