Canon EOS M Series Cameras

Messages
444
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
Good afternoon all, I currently have a 70D with 10-18 IS STM & 18-135mm IS STM lenses. I have some cash put aside to upgrade to an 80D but Mirrorless seems to be the way things are going. So I have a couple of questions, would the M5 be a good alternative to the 80D? Would I be better off getting M lenses or an adaptor and using the ones I have? Are the M lenses any better than what I have? You thoughts would be appreciated.
Thank you
 

Cobra

Mr. Floyd
Staff member
Messages
92,369
Name
Phitt, Hissy Phitt
Edit My Images
No
but Mirrorless seems to be the way things are going.


It really depends on what you are looking for Simon.
My main camera is a 7DII and I've no intention of getting rid.
I went for the M50 as I was finding the "Macro set up" with the 7D a tad heavy these days.
But with the M50 I can hand hold very comfortably the Canon 100mm Macro, the MR14ex flash and the Meike lens adapter.

I've tried the M50 with the canon 70-200 2.8 is MKII and the 100-400 canon MKII
I find both combo's clumsy, as the body is so light.

The only dedicated lens I've tried with the M50 is the kit 15- 45 with good results. Although this is rather short for my needs.

Obviously with the adapter the af its a little slow, but it works for me.
Shot with the afore mentioned macro set up (y)


051
by Cobra, on Flickr


080
by Cobra, on Flickr


053
by Cobra, on Flickr
 
Messages
6,825
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Good afternoon all, I currently have a 70D with 10-18 IS STM & 18-135mm IS STM lenses. I have some cash put aside to upgrade to an 80D but Mirrorless seems to be the way things are going. So I have a couple of questions, would the M5 be a good alternative to the 80D? Would I be better off getting M lenses or an adaptor and using the ones I have? Are the M lenses any better than what I have? You thoughts would be appreciated.
Thank you
.... My first D-SLR was a 70D and it was excellent. I moved to a 7D-2 and then a M5 as a second body and I only shot with EF lenses. I have now moved to Olympus E-M1X Pro system.

The image quality of the M5 is stunning [dragonfly example below] but as @Cobra says, its body feels very out of physical balance with bigger lenses such as the EF 100-400mm when handheld. I have even shot with the M5 mounted on the EF 500mm F/4L II both with and without Extenders but of course mounted on a gimbal tripod.

UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL AND NOT SHY
by Robin Procter, on Flickr

The 80D is reputed to be an excellent camera but if you are considering a mirrorless future then what about an EOS-R body with EF Adapter? I have one (and will be advertising it for sale soon). But I am not suggesting this because of selling - I have experience of it and am sharing information to help.

My EOS-R Album : https://www.flickr.com/photos/114775606@N07/albums/72157703352623054

However, if you are going to stick with STM lenses then a full-frame body may not exploit the best out of the EOS system.
 
Messages
14,806
Name
Michael
Edit My Images
No
Thanks guys. Food for thought and fantastic images(y)
The m6 mark2 seems worth looking at too, Gordon Laing's reviews were quite good and very informative.

Adapted lenses work great on my m50, (I use the viltrox version) My 18-135 is used all the time as the standard walk about. Also get to use the latest 70-300 is ef lens as my dad has one, works great on the m50. Would certainly recommend the m50 too, it's all down to what you would like to get out of the camera.

22mmf2 is a cracking M mount lens too.
 
Messages
6,678
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,
I am a Nikon shooter and as some of you may know I like my Macro photography and I use a D500 with a Tokina 100/2.8
I was looking at a Nikon Z50 but there is no image stabilisation on this one so I am looking about for something else, I have seen this
Canon EOS M5 as it does have image stabilisation but what I would like to know is how is the noise on this camera for close-up stuff, Ok I`m going to knock Canon but they are not the best for bringing noise into shot.
Living in the Southeast of France bright sunlight is not a problem (and I always use a flash)
So, pursued me or otherwise.
I will still use my Tokina 100/2.8 Nikon mound and one of them Nikon to Canon lens adaptors.
I will primarily use this Camera just for Macro.
Is it worth it ?
 

Cobra

Mr. Floyd
Staff member
Messages
92,369
Name
Phitt, Hissy Phitt
Edit My Images
No
I'm more than happy with the "cheaper" M50. And the canon dedicated macro lens
BUT I do need an adapter as the "M" doesn't support either the EF or EFs range of lenses.
(Normal Canon fittings) this does slow the AF a little.

As I understand it, what you are asking is that you will need 2 x adapters ie Nikon to canon and canon ef/s to M fitting.
IMO its likely that you will lose AF in this instance.

The normal fitment for the M series is EF M.
Well played canon :rolleyes:

As for noise, I've never really pushed it, as 9/10 times I have a ring flash attached.
And usually shoot at around f/16 & 1/200th iso circa 200 +/- a tad.

"small stuff" in my sig mostly was shot as above settings
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,678
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
The Canon M5 doesn't have in body image stabilisation for stills photography, only for video.

TBH if you always use flash then IS is not really needed anyway.
haha the older I get the more I shake so I thought it would help a bit.
Ah that`s a bit of a bummer for no IS with stills, oh well, I`ll keep looking.
Thanks
 
Messages
4,699
Edit My Images
No
haha the older I get the more I shake so I thought it would help a bit.
Ah that`s a bit of a bummer for no IS with stills, oh well, I`ll keep looking.
Thanks
If I were after a camera body purely for macro I would be looking at something with a smaller sensor like an Olympus or Panasonic. They will give you much more depth of field plus they have in body stabilisation. Again noise shouldn't be an issue if using flash and I imagine you can get an adapter for your Tokina although it will probably be manual focus only (but then most people use MF anyway)
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,678
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks Mike,
As it goes I use af 90% of the time.
And thanks for the heads up with oly or pano.
If I were after a camera body purely for macro I would be looking at something with a smaller sensor like an Olympus or Panasonic. They will give you much more depth of field plus they have in body stabilisation. Again noise shouldn't be an issue if using flash and I imagine you can get an adapter for your Tokina although it will probably be manual focus only (but then most people use MF anyway)
 

Cobra

Mr. Floyd
Staff member
Messages
92,369
Name
Phitt, Hissy Phitt
Edit My Images
No
M5 and MP-E 65mm
Damn! that's close!

I'd seriously thought about an MPE, but in the end I went for the 100mm IS upgrade from the USM
That arrived yesterday, I got a few shots off with it, and I have to say I'm impressed with combination.
M50 + 100mm IS L Macro lens


012
by Cobra, on Flickr


006
by Cobra, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,699
Edit My Images
No
Damn! that's close!

I'd seriously thought about an MPE, but in the end I went for the 100mm IS upgrade from the USM
That arrived yesterday, I got a few shots off with it, and I have to say I'm impressed with combination.
M50 + 100mm IS L Macro lens
The MPE is a pain to use but can produce excellent pictures when you get it right (about 1 in 20 where I am concerned). I also have the 100mmL and it really is a superb lens, I found it good on the 7D but I think macro is so much easier on a mirrorless body.

M5 and 100mm L

Red Damselfly
by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr
 

Cobra

Mr. Floyd
Staff member
Messages
92,369
Name
Phitt, Hissy Phitt
Edit My Images
No
The MPE is a pain to use but can produce excellent pictures when you get it right
I agree but I doubt I have the patience TBH :D

I found it good on the 7D but I think macro is so much easier on a mirrorless body.
I have a gripped 7DII and I was beginning to find it "difficult" mostly due to the weight hence the M50 macro set up. I like it (y)
The only slight disappointment was discovering the MR14-EX didn't attach directly to the 100mm IS L.
Oh well there are step down rings to be had (y)
 

Cobra

Mr. Floyd
Staff member
Messages
92,369
Name
Phitt, Hissy Phitt
Edit My Images
No
while I was doing that the wife has watered all the plants and in the process drowned all the insects. :oops: :$
What I do is before I "water" I squirt a few drops of water onto and around the plants.
Hopefully they think its rain starting and dive for cover, before I "soak" anything.
 
Messages
2,842
Edit My Images
Yes
Not long joined the M series gang with an M5 I got from here. I've got the 15-45 and 18-55 lenses. Is the 18-135mm a bit improvement in iq and focus speed over these? I appreciate it's a bigger lump than the two I have and I'm fine with that. Also looking at the 55-250 for something a bit longer. It's a real one of the other at the moment hence the question on the 18-135 for s better Walkabout lens.
 

Cobra

Mr. Floyd
Staff member
Messages
92,369
Name
Phitt, Hissy Phitt
Edit My Images
No
I've got the 15-45 and 18-55 lenses. Is the 18-135mm a bit improvement in iq and focus speed over these?
Can't really help TBH.
I rarely use the kit lens TBH, but I find it very capable when I do, mostly I shoot Macro with my M50, with a lens adapter and the Canon 100mm is L lens.
 
Messages
2,842
Edit My Images
Yes
Hiya and yeah your shots are cracking, I wouldn't mind a macro lens as well but it's not top of my list right now. Although I could be tempted!
 
Messages
866
Name
Steve Bennett
Edit My Images
No
Not long joined the M series gang with an M5 I got from here. I've got the 15-45 and 18-55 lenses. Is the 18-135mm a bit improvement in iq and focus speed over these? I appreciate it's a bigger lump than the two I have and I'm fine with that. Also looking at the 55-250 for something a bit longer. It's a real one of the other at the moment hence the question on the 18-135 for s better Walkabout lens.
The latest version EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS STM is very good and great value for money, the earlier ones are not so good though.
 
Messages
2,842
Edit My Images
Yes
That's the version I was looking at, also wondering what the Tamron 18-200 is like and is it substantially different to the ef version to warrant the price increase.
 

Cobra

Mr. Floyd
Staff member
Messages
92,369
Name
Phitt, Hissy Phitt
Edit My Images
No
I wish I had kept the 100-400mm MKII and sold the Sigma instead I think.
Looking at most images taken with the Sigma, I'd never swap my 100-400 II for that.
The 1.4x would have been (IMO) a better way of getting nearer the 600mm mark, with no loss of aperture values.

Balance on the M5 is rubbish anyway though.
I tried my 100-400 MKII and the 70-200 MKII 2.8is on my M50.
I'll stick with the macro set up on the M50 and leave the longer reaches to the gripped 7D II
 
Last edited:
Top