Has the M-Series Arrived?

[Busted Knuckles]

I thought the M5 feature list would make a great 6DII... without a mirror....

All I can say, is that there are options in the $1000 to $2000 range that have features that would blow the mind of anyone in the market for a 20D, or even a 50D.

If you can limit the size of the sensor to APC (50D) and are willing to trade off to the MF4/3 both Pany/Oly offerings are just chuck long in features (who knows if all of them are useful).

Here is a wild statement, if the M5 had 4k video there would already be one on my desk, with the two kit lenses and my 5dIII donated to a local highschool or something. Particularly if Canon would reverse tele an adapter ala metabones. As an enthusiast that would give me all that I could imagine.

[HDNitehawk]

If it came out with 4k video I doubt I would have found one in stock at B&H. With the digital image stabilization maybe it will be a very good video camera. DSLR's AF for video has improved in recent models, but shooting handheld video is still a pain.

[HDNitehawk]

It arrived and the battery is charging. The manual is about the same size of the camera and so far positive on the initial unpacking.

What about adapters. Is the Canon version really worth $140 more than this one?
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...apter_for.html

[Sean Setters]

It arrived and the battery is charging. The manual is about the same size of the camera and so far positive on the initial unpacking.

What about adapters. Is the Canon version really worth $140 more than this one?
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...apter_for.html

Good question. If it were me, I'd get the Vello adapter simply because I wouldn't plan on using it *that* much, so the very slight amount of play in the fit is something I could live with. And think of it this way; if the Vello one works, you've saved a bundle over the Canon version. If it doesn't work out, then you can return it and get the Canon one instead.

[HDNitehawk]

With a tele M I guess I wouldn't need adapter that often, only if I want to use it on the 500mm. Video that might happen, I ordered the Vello.

I also ordered the 55 x 200mm.
Anyone know if there is any other benefit of having the new 18 x 150mm rather than the 55 x 200mm? Image quality? Video?
Will the 55 x 200mm work with the digital IS and video?

Other than the obvious which the 18 x 150mm will arguably give you a more usable every day focal range.
The two are almost the exact same dimensions, the 55-200mm is over an ounce lighter. The 18-150mm gives you .5 stop IS advantage.

FYI the 55 x 200mm is on the way.

[Kayaker72]

I haven't yet found what I would call a reputable review of the EFM 18-150. I have seen a couple of videos from people I am not familiar with and the IQ does look pretty good. Most of my interest actually comes from the MTF chart:

What I see is pretty impressive. Starting at 90% transmittance wide open both at 18 mm and 150 mm, but getting into rarefied air by f/8 (I am assuming the light blue line is hidden by the thicker lines above). Not only at the center, but the theoretical transmittance is pretty even across the frame.

Compare that to the EFm 18-55, which is my current main lens on my M1 (and I am happy with)

The EFm 18-150 is just better. Period. Across the board.

Compared tot he EFm 55-200:

Again, I would take the EFm 18-150. The 55-200 isn't awful, but edge of from is going to have issues and even at the center of frame, f/8 is at ~90%.

But, the EFm 11-22 still reigns:

For a small UWA lens, no wonder Bryan's tests came out like they did.

Anyway, the MTF has me very interested in the EFm 18-150. We will see, but if I choose to keep my M kit, I could see swapping out the EFm 18-55 for it.

[HDNitehawk]

I charged the battery and put a card in the camera last night and left it for the wife to find. She sent me a message and told me how much she loved it, it was smaller and more compact than the t4i and she knew she was going to like it. I should mention she didn't know how to turn it on and she just left it on the table all night. What she sees as value in the camera isn't the same as our view.

Swapping the 18-55mm for the 18-150mm seems to lose sight of the main positive, the small size of the camera. On trips the wife occasional wants a longer focal length lens, not often but the subject always comes up on trips.

[Kayaker72]

She sent me a message and told me how much she loved it, it was smaller and more compact than the t4i and she knew she was going to like it.

That is great. I am glad she is happy. I do think the visceral part of photography is understated. So if she can pick it up and it just feels right to her, that is great.

Swapping the 18-55mm for the 18-150mm seems to lose sight of the main positive, the small size of the camera.

For the best IQ, I will always pack my 5DIII and some assortment of lenses. That will be most of the time. But, for times when I want smaller/lighter/less valuable, I will pack something else. So, for me, three parameters come into play: IQ, size/weight, and utility. It becomes trade offs between the three as soon as I move off the 5DIII kit. The camera in my iPhone is the lower rung for IQ, but as I already am carrying it, it is the best on size/weight. Utility is pretty low as well.

For a quick example, I currently use the M1 almost exclusively with the EFm 18-55. But, if I am going to use the M1 in that way, I might as well have a G"X"x (G9x or G7x) which have a much better form factor (size/weight), pretty good IQ, and slightly more "utility" over the M1/EFm 18-55 combo as the powershots actually cover a wider focal length range, have wider aperture lenses and a few other features such as Wi-Fi, etc.

For me, to own the "M" kit, which should have slightly better IQ, but they need to provide more "utility" over a G"X"x P&S cameras to offset the advantage in size/weight. Thus, if I am going to own a "M" kit, I am deciding that I need focal length ranges outside the 24-100 mm range of the G7x II, otherwise I should just own the G7x II. Thus, my recent pick up of the EFm 11-22 and 18-150 mm (which is only 1" longer than the 18-55). Other utility would likely be the faster AF of the DPAF of the M5 and the 28 mm macro lens.

What I think I am settling in on, for myself, is to augment my current M kit, and pick up a G"X"x P&S. Own both for a year and then sell off whatever I do not use much. As to which G"X"x body, I am likely heading into a store to handle the different options.

Also, on the trade offs, M1 is 4.3" x 2.6" x 1.2" or 13.4 in3. The M5 is 4.6" x 3.5" x 2.4" or 38.6 in3. Size/weight vs IQ vs utility. If I decide to keep my M system, I will likely upgrade to the M5 eventually for DPAF, etc. But it is yet another trade off.

As for the IQ of the Gx point and shoot vs the M system, they really aren't far behind (assuming 80D and M5 have similar if not identical sensors):

[Kayaker72]

I was thinking about this a bit more and looking at Canon's naming strategy, I am also thinking that this is the first look at the future line up:

dSLRs:
1Dx, 5D, 6D, 7D.

I also wonder if the 80D will eventually slide in as the 9D or 10D??? The future of the Rebels, IMO, is in doubt. Maybe Canon have one as the 100D, but I am wondering if they will target that market segment with mirrorless.

Mirrorless ILCs:
M1x, M5, M10.

Officially, what many call the M1 was actually the "EOS-M", so Canon could come back and introduce an upscale, potentially FF mirrorless, and call it the M1, but I suspect they will call it the "M1x" as they seem to love adding "X" to things. I had been wondering why they skipped the "M4" and added the "M10," but it makes a lot of sense if they are setting up this future naming scheme for a lineup of cameras. So introduce an M1x and others depending on how sales go.

High End P&S:
G1x, G3x, G5x, G7x, G9x

[HDNitehawk]

Not far behind? Small advantages in a graph like this can be huge for pixel peepers on photo sites. The M5's sensor has Canon's highest pixel density in ILC. I am curious how it will fare on the 500mm. I wasn't interested in the original M since its sensor seemed to be closer to the old 7D. But this one might have potential if it fares as well as the 7D II.

My first impressions:
Let me qualify this, I used the camera last night at the wife's families Christmas / Birthday party, and played with it some at home. All in the evening with low light.


The M5 has two green box settings. Auto Mode (Scene Intelligent Auto) is crap for what it should do. This is a mode that anyone should be able to pick the camera up and take pictures, and they can, although the AF hunts far too much, the exposure fluctuates wildly and you can not turn off the annoying 2 second review. Try catching a Granddaughter kissing a 80+ year old Grandfather on the cheek you have to have great timing. By the time it hunts and gets focus, take the shot and review 4 seconds have passed. I could not find a setting in Auto Mode to turn off the 2 second review. If I were a first time buyer and were playing with the camera at the store, there is no way I would buy it.

The second green box setting is Hybrid Auto Mode, I didn't use it much but it has an option to get rid of the 2 second review. Why this matters? You are shooting in live view mode. If you are using the digital viewfinder you see exactly what you see on the screen. After you shoot you are looking at a picture for 2 seconds and it is impossible to recompose and shoot again.

The second problem or advantage (from certain perspectives) with the viewfinder is that you see exactly what you see in live view. If the camera is hunting exposure you are going dark to light, in focus out of focus. It is difficult to compose when you can't see the subject.

Unless there is an automatic option which I have not found, you have to manually open the flash.

Video seemed to work very well. I did have one issue, the placement of record button is in a location that it is easy to hit. I found video recording accidently several times.

Reviewing pictures with the viewfinder was interesting. For some reason shots had a 3d feel and it was similar to looking into a Viewmaster.

The tilt screen, while functional, is not on par with the t4i's tilt abilities. It is not as well designed or as functional.

I then shot in AV mode, set the camera to shoot at high speed, servo mode, touch to AF anywhere on screen and of course with these options review is off by default. The camera performed very well.

For IQ, I never downloaded a single picture. But zoomed in to max I had very good detail on eyelash and hair. I am optimistic that the IQ will be great as expected.