# M5



## nda (Nov 28, 2016)

M5- hands-on review

https://youtu.be/PhHpV0kc7as


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 28, 2016)

Its a Commercial for Digital Rev. They want to sell you one.


----------



## Larsskv (Nov 28, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Its a Commercial for Digital Rev. They want to sell you one.



Kai has finished his work for Digital Rev...


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 28, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Its a Commercial for Digital Rev. They want to sell you one.



This is a review.

Kai and DRTV are no mas. He moved back to England and is apparently going solo now.

- A


----------



## JPAZ (Nov 28, 2016)

Kind of a nice, irreverant review like he's always done. Did not cover all the information I'd like to see but adds to the space nicely now that more are getting real-world experience with this camera. I am real interested in an ultimate M3 with EDV vs M5 comparison. After a less than wonderful M1 ownership experience (given my shooting style) just spent a weekend in NYC with the M3 / Viewfinder (left the FF kit at home) and seemed to work pretty well, but I might want to move up to the M5 someday.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 28, 2016)

JPAZ said:


> Kind of a nice, irreverant review like he's always done. Did not cover all the information I'd like to see but adds to the space nicely now that more are getting real-world experience with this camera. I am real interested in an ultimate M3 with EDV vs M5 comparison. After a less than wonderful M1 ownership experience (given my shooting style) just spent a weekend in NYC with the M3 / Viewfinder (left the FF kit at home) and seemed to work pretty well, but I might want to move up to the M5 someday.



DPAF alone should make that academic: M5 has it, M3 doesn't. Done. 

That + the integral EVF + far more useful control layout would imply that the M5 is indeed the droid you are looking for. Worth the upgrade, yeah? 

- A


----------



## JPAZ (Nov 28, 2016)

Maybe when the price comes down a bit.................

Wanna by my M!


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 29, 2016)

JPAZ said:


> Maybe when the price comes down a bit.................
> 
> Wanna by my M!



Everyone is different, so my simple math of DPAF + integral EVF = much much better may not apply to you.

Just make sure you rent an M5 or give one a healthy hands-on test in a store (and take shots you can review at home) before you plunk your money down. Perhaps DPAF is not what you were missing with your M3, the size is actually _too big_ for you, etc. 

- A


----------



## Luds34 (Nov 29, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Everyone is different, so my simple math of DPAF + integral EVF = much much better may not apply to you.



Finally! Canon releases a mirrorless crop camera that is worthy of the competition??? 

I think DPAF is objectively better, who would *not* want that feature? I get the integrated viewfinder a little, but those who don't want one are probably in the minority. Either way, there is the M1, M2, M3, M10 if no evf is your cup of tea.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 29, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> Finally! Canon releases a mirrorless crop camera that is worthy of the competition???
> 
> I think DPAF is objectively better, who would *not* want that feature?



Sure, and I agree. I'm just saying you don't make a buying decision on the binary logic that DPAF -- as great as it is -- will solve 100% of your issues or concerns with EOS M. 

For instance, the M5 is a hot mess if you want to vlog yourself with a stabilizer like Kai shows at 0:44 of the video. That's a non-starter for some folks. Further, the M5 costs more than twice as much as an M3! Again: rent/try one before you buy one, that's all.

- A


----------



## Luds34 (Dec 1, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Finally! Canon releases a mirrorless crop camera that is worthy of the competition???
> ...



I was speaking more generally to your points about DPAF, etc. However, if you want to talk specifics, aka the M5 then I completely see/understand your points about price, etc. Heck the firmware/menu system being shared with the powershot series is a big hangup for others.

But back to the abstract, who wouldn't take DPAF over not having it? 

Either way, the M5 at least on paper, starts to represent the kind of compact, mirrorless camera (from Canon) that enthusiasts can get behind. Of course I feel it is all a moot point until they can pack up that camera with a good lens lineup. Canon's getting there in this market, just need to give them a good 2 or 3 years yet.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 1, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> Either way, the M5 at least on paper, starts to represent the kind of compact, mirrorless camera (from Canon) that enthusiasts can get behind. Of course I feel it is all a moot point until they can pack up that camera with a good lens lineup. Canon's getting there in this market, just need to give them a good 2 or 3 years yet.



Agree, of course -- EOS M has been waiting for DPAF for quite some time and an integral EVF since the inception of the brand. So let's check those two boxes off and say 'at last'.

Next must be the glass. I think APS-C mirrorless lives and dies by being small, and we need more / higher quality / fully featured EF-M lenses: USM (or Nano USM) AF, FTM mechanical focusing, fast max aperture but not so quick as to get too big, etc. And I insist they must be native EF-M: adapters to EF make things too big, and EF-S lacks the (first party) primes.

Since EOS M already has a formidable (though non USM) 22mm f/2 pancake, I think the crop version of a 24 / 50 / 85 prime would round things out, say an EF-M 15mm f/2 USM, 30mm f/2 USM and 55mm f/2 USM would fit the bill nicely and pair well with a more fully featured rig like the M5.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 1, 2016)

ah, the usual whimpering and whining over Canon EF-M glass. Mimimimimi ... ;D 

i am *perfectly happy* with the current lineup. 22/2, 28/2.8, 11-22, 18-55, 55-200 are all fine. [15-45 is the only weak one, even for an ultra-compact kit zoom.]. 18-150 don't know yet. May take it, if/when offered in a worthwhile M5 kit, sometime 2017. 

Only one EF-M lens is missing: a compact EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS or thereabouts for portraits, street, events, concerts, etc. ... optically as good as and pricewise similarly dirt cheap as the fabulous 22/2.0. Better mechanical properties or USM drive etc. not needed. Manual focusing ring & gear could be omitted as far as I am concerned. STM AF drive is brilliant for mirrorless DPAF and small glass.


----------



## brad-man (Dec 1, 2016)

I suspect this camera would benefit greatly with an updated ST-E3 with AF assist light. The need for more quick primes is obvious to _most_ on this forum...


----------



## Luds34 (Dec 1, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> ah, the usual whimpering and whining over Canon EF-M glass. Mimimimimi ... ;D
> 
> i am *perfectly happy* with the current lineup.



One, you must not have spent time around young children as I don't think you know what whining is. 

Two, ahhhh I should have known, *you're* completely happy with the EF-M lens lineup so therefore we all should be content. In fact Canon probably saw in a previous thread how happy you were with the lens lineup and therefore has stopped development and now considers the EF-M lineup complete.


----------



## dak723 (Dec 1, 2016)

My guess is the vast majority of folks want two zoom lenses - a normal focal length and a telephoto. A few more folks might want a wider angle zoom. Zooms are so good nowadays, only a select few want primes. I used my last prime lens around 1995 and have never felt even the slightest urge to get another. Just my opinion, of course.


----------



## bholliman (Dec 1, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Since EOS M already has a formidable (though non USM) 22mm f/2 pancake, I think the crop version of a 24 / 50 / 85 prime would round things out, say an EF-M 15mm f/2 USM, 30mm f/2 USM and 55mm f/2 USM would fit the bill nicely and pair well with a more fully featured rig like the M5.
> - A





Luds34 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > ah, the usual whimpering and whining over Canon EF-M glass. Mimimimimi ... ;D
> ...



I would like to see some additional primes to better round out the M glass line-up, but I'm pretty comfortable with my current M5 and kit:

(1) EF-M 15-45 - compact standard zoom
(2) EF-M 55-200 tele zoom
(3) EF-M 22/2 - super compact prime
(4*) EF 50 STM mounted on an M adapter

Using the 50 STM on an adaptor fills the portrait prime gap in the current lineup and its small/light enough even mounted on an adapter that I works well with a compact kit. I'd love to see Canon come out with a 55mm and 85mm EF-M prime at some point.

This 4 lens combination gives me 24mm-320mm full format equivalent focal length coverage with slow zooms and the two primes (35 and 80mm equivalent) for low light and option for shallow depth of field.

I haven't experimented with my better quality EF L lenses on the M5 yet, but plan to this weekend just to experiment. I don't expect its something I will do with any frequency, even with the M5's capable autofocus capability since the whole idea behind the M series is small size and limited weight.

My M5 + 15-45 kit arrived yesterday as did by EF-M 55-200. Limited time and terrible weather have prevented any serious photography yet, but I was able do to some shooting with it yesterday during my lunch hour. I like how it handles and am initially impressed with the EVF and auto focus system. I'll run it through more thorough testing shooting the kids this weekend and I'll report back next week.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 1, 2016)

Fast primes [like f/1.4 or 1.2] or big fat f/2.8 zooms are just not going to happen in EF-M mount. 

EF-M = APS-C image only. 
Target: compact, light, cheap lenses with decent IQ, mainly zooms. Cover focal lengths and modest apertures and leverage short flange-distance. 
Target achieved. 

"EF-X" will definitely come for FF mirrorless. It will include multiple tiers of lenses, including "L"-type glass / fast primes, big fat expensive zooms ... just like EF which it will (eventually) replace.

It is clear to see, what's going to happen. Only the speed of transition is not fully known yet.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 2, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Fast primes [like f/1.4 or 1.2] or big fat f/2.8 zooms are just not going to happen in EF-M mount.
> 
> EF-M = APS-C image only.
> Target: compact, light, cheap lenses with decent IQ, mainly zooms. Cover focal lengths and modest apertures and leverage short flange-distance.
> ...



Fuji has no trouble at all selling fast primes.

The 7D2, D500, etc. is not by any means a light camera.

APS-C and m43 can cover more needs than you are giving it credit for. 

With Canon and Nikon, higher quality APS-C lens offerings are nerfed by design as they have something much nicer for you to move up to in FF. But Fuji, Olympus, etc. have higher end kit for non-FF lenses because it is their highest price point sensor (disregarding the brand new Fuji MF rig).

So, yes, APS-C _can _be cheap and light, and with battleships of options in the pricey FF space as the upmarket option, Canon and Nikon think that's the right way to go with APS-C. They are correct given their realities. But I think they're something refreshing to be considered with a Fuji, which is investing in APS-C with some decent lens offerings Canon and Nikon would never bother with. 

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 2, 2016)

as you noted, fuji went a different route. APS-C only plus now "pseudo MF" as top of the line. i cannot see canon going that way. i am convinced they'll stick to APS-C plus FF sensored cameras also in the mirrorless age. AS with DSLRs, APS-C will be a limited offering and FF will be the full universe with multiple tiers of lenses. 

as stupid as i think canon often acts, on this one i see them on the right track. they may be able to pull off the transition to solid ste camera and may remaim #1. if they finally launch a decent enough FF MIL system - cameras and lenses - they will get a large share of their client base to putchase new cameras AND new native lenses, including expensive/"premium" = high margin items. so, canon may not be ******* (yet). 

fuji on the other hand will remain a small niche player. not sure, for how long their business model will be sustainabke (if you ask me, "fuji is *******").


----------



## pokerz (Dec 2, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Fast primes [like f/1.4 or 1.2] or big fat f/2.8 zooms are just not going to happen in EF-M mount.
> 
> EF-M = APS-C image only.
> Target: compact, light, cheap lenses with decent IQ, mainly zooms. Cover focal lengths and modest apertures and leverage short flange-distance.
> ...


"EF-X"　means end of DSLR for Canon?


----------



## weixing (Dec 2, 2016)

pokerz said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Fast primes [like f/1.4 or 1.2] or big fat f/2.8 zooms are just not going to happen in EF-M mount.
> ...


Hi,
IMHO, Canon will maintain the EF lens even for their FF mirrorless... no transition required. Also, this way they can come out with a mirrorless FF any time without the pressure of lack of lens and avoid angry customers who had invested a lot in Canon lens.

Have a nice day.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 2, 2016)

I expect Canon to come out with new native mirrorless "EF-X" mount and a starting lineup of lenses. All EF glass will remain fully functional via a simple adapter. Just like they did for EOS M. 

Over some time, EF-X will supplant EF. Canon Fan Boys will happily buy all their glass all over again as EF-X lenses. Just like they did, when EF replaced FD ... because they got AF. This time they get solid state cameras and all the advantages that go with it. Transition will be far less pain ful than FD > EF though, because all that's needed is a simple & cheap adapter w/o optical elements. 

Big business for many years to come. Canon would be really stupid NOT to introduce a new mount and new lenses for FF mirrorless.


----------



## docsmith (Dec 2, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Over some time, EF-X will supplant EF.



Transition to be completed by 2035.....


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 2, 2016)

docsmith said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Over some time, EF-X will supplant EF.
> ...



well, FD >> EF certainly was faster. on the other hand, this time EF lenses will keep working via adapter, so I also think there will be a longer transition period. But I do expect the last new Canon mirrorslapper and the last EF lens to be produced well before 2035 ...


----------



## JMZawodny (Dec 2, 2016)

It is kind of funny to see this thread immediately change topic from the OP. To be fair, that "review" was pretty worthless.


----------



## Luds34 (Dec 2, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Big business for many years to come. Canon would be really stupid NOT to introduce a new mount and new lenses for FF mirrorless.



See this is the problem with the interwebs, can't always tell is someone is being serious or sarcastic. The smiley face along with the extreme position of "really stupid" would lean towards sarcasm. Yet your other comments all revolve around this happening.

Maybe someday??? But I don't see Canon abandoning the EF mount anytime soon. 

One, why alienate your loyal customers? While most of Canon's customers buy a Rebel and never take off the kit lens, the handful of us enthusiasts and pros represent a good chunk of revenue pie for Canon. Those of us with a lot of Canon glass have a vested interest in the system and there is real cost to switching. New mount? Destroy the value of EF glass on the secondary market? At that point, one knows they need to move to a new system, and guess what it isn't guaranteed to be Canon, they might be a bit bitter for all their glass going the way of "last year's system" and abandon Canon on principal. 

Two, Canon has arguably the best lens lineup/ecosystem bar none. Why throw that all away? Do you think R&D is free? Do you know how many engineering man years would be spent redeveloping that lineup for a new mount? How is the non trivial cost "good business sense" for Canon?

Three, Sony is a real life example of the pros and cons of a reduced FF mirrorless mount. All of a sudden a majority of the lenses have increased in size to make up for the short flange mount. So the size savings on the camera is offset by the lens size. Now put 2 lenses in your bag, 3, even 4, and the increased lens size cost become more dramatic.

So I come to the opposite conclusion... Canon would be really stupid to deliver a new mount right now.


----------



## jd7 (Dec 3, 2016)

bholliman said:


> I would like to see some additional primes to better round out the M glass line-up, but I'm pretty comfortable with my current M5 and kit:
> 
> (1) EF-M 15-45 - compact standard zoom
> (2) EF-M 55-200 tele zoom
> ...



Just wondering what made you choose the EF-M 15-45 over the EF-M 18-55? Just came in a kit with the M5? 

I'm not in the market for an M5 quite yet but maybe one of these days, and if I did get one, I'm not sure which of those two I would go for. I like the idea of 15 at the wide end, and the compactness of the 15-45, but I get the impression the 18-55 is better optically(?).


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 3, 2016)

I'm sure we've been through this discussion before 

Canon have tested the waters with the EOS-M range and have actually done very well with them (especially in Asia.) The EOS M5 looks like it will be an absolute winner.

If anyone thinks that Canon are going to sit back and ignore the market potential of a full-frame mirrorless camera then they really don't understand the market.

I think it's inevitable we'll see a FF mirrorless announcement sometime in 2017.


----------



## Eagle Eye (Dec 3, 2016)

No doubt Canon needs to get some more EF-M glass to market. I am very excited for the 18-150, though. Same filter size as the 11-22 and enough range that I'm going to let go of my 18-55 and 55-200. I just added in the Rokinon 50mm f1.2. Holy bokeh. Manual aperture and focus isn't everyone's bag, but I love it. With the Rok. 35mm f/1.2 on its way to market, I feel like I'm going to have a great lens setup for my M2 in the coming months. 11-22, 18-150, 22mm f/2, 35mm f1.2, 50mm f/1.2. May even pick up a 28mm macro if I can find a good deal. I've barely touched my 6D and L primes and zooms in the past 18 months. It's looking less and less likely that I'll ever go back to it. Probably will pick up the M5, but the price is going to need to drop a couple hundred. I bought my 6D refurbished from Canon (it was definitely new) for $899. Can't justify spending more on a crop mirrorless.


----------



## Eagle Eye (Dec 3, 2016)

jolyonralph said:


> I'm sure we've been through this discussion before
> 
> Canon have tested the waters with the EOS-M range and have actually done very well with them (especially in Asia.) The EOS M5 looks like it will be an absolute winner.
> 
> ...



Maybe a full frame with a retro look and an FD lens mount?


----------



## bholliman (Dec 3, 2016)

jd7 said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > I would like to see some additional primes to better round out the M glass line-up, but I'm pretty comfortable with my current M5 and kit:
> ...



I went with the 15-45 primarily for its

compact size (not much bigger than the 22/2)
15mm on the wide end
the price was right - only roughly $100 as part of the M5 kit
I had an EF-M 18-55 that I just sold along with my M1. I did a little side-by-side shooting with the two lenses and I couldn't see much difference optically, but its wasn't serious testing. The 18-55 is a little sturdier (metal body) and f/5.6 at the long end instead of f/6.3, but those factors didn't outweigh size and 15mm for me. I'll be watching for serious testing of these two lenses and the rest of the EF-M line-up. For now I'm pretty well set except for UWA. I would like to pick up a 11-22 or a Rokinon 12mm at some point. The Rokinon/Samyang primes are also interesting, but I need to perfect manual focus on the M5 before I look in that direction. 

I had my M1 for nearly 3 1/2 years and never considered buying any additional lenses beyond the 22 and 18-55. I've owned the M5 for 4 days and already purchased 2 new lenses and am looking at others.


----------



## bholliman (Dec 3, 2016)

Eagle Eye said:


> No doubt Canon needs to get some more EF-M glass to market. I am very excited for the 18-150, though. Same filter size as the 11-22 and enough range that I'm going to let go of my 18-55 and 55-200. I just added in the Rokinon 50mm f1.2. Holy bokeh. Manual aperture and focus isn't everyone's bag, but I love it. With the Rok. 35mm f/1.2 on its way to market, I feel like I'm going to have a great lens setup for my M2 in the coming months. 11-22, 18-150, 22mm f/2, 35mm f1.2, 50mm f/1.2. May even pick up a 28mm macro if I can find a good deal. I've barely touched my 6D and L primes and zooms in the past 18 months. It's looking less and less likely that I'll ever go back to it. Probably will pick up the M5, but the price is going to need to drop a couple hundred. I bought my 6D refurbished from Canon (it was definitely new) for $899. Can't justify spending more on a crop mirrorless.



I thought about buying the new 18-150 instead of the 55-200, but decided to go with the older lens when it was on sale as a refurb last week. I'll be watching for reviews.


----------



## jd7 (Dec 6, 2016)

bholliman said:


> jd7 said:
> 
> 
> > bholliman said:
> ...



Thanks! Will be interested to see what you think of the 15-45 once you've used it for a while, but as long as the optics are at least close to the 18-55, I can certainly see the attraction of the 15-45.


----------



## Act444 (Dec 6, 2016)

I bought the 18-55 back shortly after I got the original M...once the M10 and 15-45 lens came out, I never touched the 18-55 again. I do feel the 18-55 is a little better optically, but it's not a significant difference. The extra 3mm on the wide end makes a much bigger difference in my opinion. Oh yeah, and it's smaller too. I've since sold the 18-55 and now run with 11-22/22/15-45/55-200 for the M system.


----------



## crashpc (Dec 6, 2016)

Eagle Eye said:


> No doubt Canon needs to get some more EF-M glass to market. I am very excited for the 18-150, though. Same filter size as the 11-22 and enough range that I'm going to let go of my 18-55 and 55-200. I just added in the Rokinon 50mm f1.2. Holy bokeh. Manual aperture and focus isn't everyone's bag, but I love it. With the Rok. 35mm f/1.2 on its way to market, I feel like I'm going to have a great lens setup for my M2 in the coming months. 11-22, 18-150, 22mm f/2, 35mm f1.2, 50mm f/1.2. May even pick up a 28mm macro if I can find a good deal. I've barely touched my 6D and L primes and zooms in the past 18 months. It's looking less and less likely that I'll ever go back to it. Probably will pick up the M5, but the price is going to need to drop a couple hundred. I bought my 6D refurbished from Canon (it was definitely new) for $899. Can't justify spending more on a crop mirrorless.



While looking at 6D, M5 and Samyang 50mm f/1.2, heading to the final decision, due to system usability, size, weight and price, more and more people owning the Samyang 50mm f/1.2 emerge.
Can you please elaborate a little on that lens on M body? How is focusing at further distances? Do you have any idea about comparison with Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM? Is the Samyang better wide open? 
Any info or recommendation appreciated.
Thank you.


----------

