# EOS M3 Owners - is your performance via the EF Adapter worse?



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 19, 2015)

Hello everyone. I'm in the middle of my EOS M3 review after a few months of ownership and before it hits the North American market. One oddity that I've encountered is that I feel that the performance of adapted lenses via the EF Adapter (official Canon one) is actually _*poorer*_ than the original M (which I still have).

This is true even with STM lenses. The EF-S 55-250 STM is reasonably fast (usable) via adapter on the M; it is glacially slow via adapter on the M3.

What is your experience? Are you discovering the same thing, or is this something specific to my body/adapter combination?


----------



## smozes (Sep 19, 2015)

Canon posted a list of EF lenses that are not guaranteed to achieve AF on the M3:

http://www.canon.co.uk/support/consumer_products/content/?itemid=tcm:14-1254703

There is currently a firmware update specifically addressing problems with the 55-250.


----------



## twagn (Sep 19, 2015)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> The EF-S 55-250 STM is reasonably fast (usable) via adapter on the M; it is glacially slow via adapter on the M3.



No noticeable difference in focus speed using the 55-250 STM with the Canon adaptor on my M1. It's very good (like my native EF-M lenses)... in good light


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 19, 2015)

twagn said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > The EF-S 55-250 STM is reasonably fast (usable) via adapter on the M; it is glacially slow via adapter on the M3.
> ...



That's what I notice when using the original M, but it slows noticeably down on the M3. I feel like the adapter must not be optimized for the changes to the AF process in the newer body.


----------



## smozes (Sep 19, 2015)

Here's the firmware update:

http://www.canon.co.uk/support/consumer_products/content/faq/?itemid=tcm:14-1278808



> Firmware Version 1.0.1 incorporates the following enhancement:
> 1. Improves the autofocus speed of an EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM attached to the EOS M3.
> • To mount the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM to the EOS M3, the mount adapter EF-EOS M is required.
> • The enhancement in the autofocus speed only applies when the lens is used with the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 19, 2015)

smozes said:


> Canon posted a list of EF lenses that are not guaranteed to achieve AF on the M3:
> 
> http://www.canon.co.uk/support/consumer_products/content/?itemid=tcm:14-1254703
> 
> There is currently a firmware update specifically addressing problems with the 55-250.



Thanks for the tip. I downloaded the firmware update and it installed, but I honestly don't notice much of an improvement. It still focuses noticeably faster and more confidently with the original M. It makes me feel like the adapter needs a revision to work properly with the new AF system.


----------



## SeppOz (Sep 20, 2015)

Thanks for the update. Also spotted the following:
https://www.canon.com.au/en-AU/Personal/Support-Help/Support-News/Firmware-Updates/EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-56-IS-STM-firmware-update-1-0-3

_"EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Firmware Update version 1.0.3

Thank you for using Canon products.

Firmware Version 1.0.3 incorporates the following enhancement. 

1. Improves the autofocus speed when the EF-S 55-250f/4-5.6 IS STM is attached to the EOS M3.
To mount the EF-S55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM to the EOS M3, the mount adapter EF-EOS M is required. 
The enhancement in the autofocus speed only applies when the lens is used with the EOS M3. "
_
So it appears that the EF-S 55-250 STM also needs updating. Have not tried this yet.


----------



## SeppOz (Sep 20, 2015)

Updating the EOS-M3 firmware only - no difference.
My lens did have the earlier version of firmware.
Downloaded the EF-S 55-250 STM firmware from ...
http://www.canon.co.uk/support/consumer_products/content/?itemid=tcm:14-1287588
Updated lens through the EOS-M3 firmware update menu.
Autofocus speed did improve.
Hope this helps.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 20, 2015)

SeppOz said:


> Updating the EOS-M3 firmware only - no difference.
> My lens did have the earlier version of firmware.
> Downloaded the EF-S 55-250 STM firmware from ...
> http://www.canon.co.uk/support/consumer_products/content/?itemid=tcm:14-1287588
> ...



You've been very thankful, thanks. I definitely noticed a much bigger difference after installing the firmware update. Clearly a number of other lenses could benefit from similar attention!


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 20, 2015)

The fact that the autofocus speed of one lens can be so drastically changed through firmware on the M3 suggests to me that a new adapter that takes better advantage of the M3's AF changes is in order.


----------



## SeppOz (Sep 21, 2015)

What I find really interesting is that for the M3, unlike say the SLRs or earlier Ms, an update of the _*lens firmware*_ was required to get acceptable autofocus operation. The difference was significant - it went from pulsing to continuous slewing. Curious as to the difference in the M3 focus system that requires this. It also makes me wonder what tweaks are done in lens firmware by Canon that we are not aware of, and if other lenses could be improved for mirror-less operation with an update.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 21, 2015)

SeppOz said:


> What I find really interesting is that for the M3, unlike say the SLRs or earlier Ms, an update of the _*lens firmware*_ was required to get acceptable autofocus operation. The difference was significant - it went from pulsing to continuous slewing. Curious as to the difference in the M3 focus system that requires this. It also makes me wonder what tweaks are done in lens firmware by Canon that we are not aware of, and if other lenses could be improved for mirror-less operation with an update.



Exactly. The only Canon lens that I had previously updated via firmware is the 40mm f/2.8 STM, and that was to solve and issue with it not "awakening" after the camera had gone to sleep. I had almost forgotten that I ever did that.

This has been a very thought provoking process. Canon has clearly made a change in the operation of this particular AF system that is a deviation from everything else.


----------



## gqllc007 (Sep 21, 2015)

Could someone please provide me with a link for this update using a mac and not windows? I have searched but cant find anything?? Never mind I found it!!!


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 21, 2015)

JP4DESIGNZ said:


> I can't wait for your review Dustin! You helped me purchase the original M and the Tamron EF-M 18-200! I think I can confirm that the autofocus speed of my M3 with my Canon adapter can be a bit slower at times than what I remember from my previous M2 while still better than my original M. While we are at it, one thing that annoys me the most is when the live view lags in low light. The previous M and M2 didn't have this issue. Also, the burst mode is terrible (1 frame per sec.) in Manual & Aperture Priority while in HDR mode, the burst rate goes back to what is advertised. I also wish I could use my YN-E3-RT with my M3 like the previous generations but let me stop rambling. The M3 is overall worth the upgrade in my opinion however, I feel like these quirks need to be addressed in firmware.



You've nailed some of the worst quirks.

On a positive note, I spent some extended time with the 55-250 STM (after the firmware updates mentioned above) side by side with the EF-M 55-200 STM and now feel that the 55-250 now focuses at least as well as the native mount 55-200. I wish I had found this information BEFORE purchasing the 55-200 STM, but now I'll review both lenses and then make a decision on which to keep.


----------



## noncho (Sep 22, 2015)

I have M and I have tested M3 for few days.

The M3 performance with adapter was a mixed bag - with Canon 40 2.8 - better, Canon 50 1.4 about the same and Sigma 105 2.8 Macro OS - noticeably worse.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Sep 24, 2015)

noncho said:


> I have M and I have tested M3 for few days.
> 
> The M3 performance with adapter was a mixed bag - with Canon 40 2.8 - better, Canon 50 1.4 about the same and Sigma 105 2.8 Macro OS - noticeably worse.



I think I'd agree on the 40. It acts pretty much like a native lens. Ironically I've put three brand new Tamrons on the M3 in the past month (18-200 VC, 35mm f/1.8 VC, and 45mm f/1.8 VC) and they all perform pretty awesome. Their focus motors seems to interact with the M3's focus system better than USM motors. They aren't loud and don't pulse back and forth the same way. Ironic that a third party focus system would work better on a Canon than Canons do.


----------



## WorkonSunday (Oct 13, 2015)

just want to report back. i use the m3 with canon adaptor. on the 24-105L it was fast enough to track bird-in-flight (large bird). but on 70-200 F4L (non-IS), it really struggles. almost as it phase detection stopped working and back to contrast detection. (i also shoot A7r, so i know the feeling, lol)


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Oct 14, 2015)

WorkonSunday said:


> just want to report back. i use the m3 with canon adaptor. on the 24-105L it was fast enough to track bird-in-flight (large bird). but on 70-200 F4L (non-IS), it really struggles. almost as it phase detection stopped working and back to contrast detection. (i also shoot A7r, so i know the feeling, lol)



I noticed the other day that my Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC won't AF at all. Not a combination I would really ever use, but just for the sake of reporting.


----------

