BudsOwl Loc: Upstate NY and New England

Has anyone out there had an opportunity to use the Canon M5, the M6, and/or the M100. If so can you discuss the pros and cons of each.I know there are a lot of knowledgeable people out there who use other systems, but at this time I only want to hear about experiences with the Canon mirrorless. Thanks in advance.
Bud

BobT Loc: southern Minnesota

Bud,

I have had experience with the Canon M (Mk1), and felt the IQ results were always as good as with my Digital Rebel cameras. I've heard good things about the M5 and M6, but know very little of the M100. I have appreciated the smaller size and weight, and especially liked using the adapter which allowed me to attach all my other Canon EF and EF-S lenses as well. For me, the Canon M series has been "2 thumbs up".

Bob

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

While in a Bricks & boards store, recently,I took a cursory glimpse of the M-5 AND the M-100< They're CANON, so they are gonna be fine, if it suits your needs, you're more than SAFE..I will not buy/have a camera that doesn't have a view-finder, optical or electronic, at least. I liked the size of those cameras, and , as was stated earlier, not much adaption needed to be able to use many of canon's lenses. RJM

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

My brief test of the M5 showed it to be far better than the M3, but still mediocre, as mirrorless cameras go. With the adapter for EF series lenses, response was too slow for my event work.

The biggest issue with Canon Mirrorless right now is that they have very few NATIVE M-series lenses. Performance with native lenses is fine.

But the catch is, everyone wants to adapt their existing dSLR lenses, and that path is not a good one.

If you're going to adapt Canon EF lenses to a mirrorless camera, I'd look at

Sony a6300/a6500 and a Metabones Smart Adapter, or

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II and a Metabones Smart Adapter or SpeedBooster, or

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85/G80 and a Metabones Smart Adapter or SpeedBooster.

In any of those scenarios, your EF and compatible lenses will work automatically with a better camera. Ken Rockwell tested the Sony A9 with Smart Adapter and was very impressed. Others have been very impressed with the Smart Adapters and SpeedBoosters on Micro 4/3 cameras. They are favorite solutions for independent videographers/filmmakers who have used Canon gear on hand. They are NOT cheap, but they are pro quality gear.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

The importance of this fact depend on how many lenses a person needs. I have been using ILC's since 1979. Typically I had a wide-angle lens, a normal lens, and a zoom telephoto lens. If I had not switched to Pentax thirty months ago, if I had stayed with Canon, I could easily see myself having an M5 + 15-45mm + 55-200mm kit, and being satisfied.

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

Ironically , I gave up the canon stuff to go PENTAX, a few years back. I don't regret it, as I now have 4 pentax bodies and some lenses that I dearly treasure. BUT!!! I know my reasons for the "switch and I would like to hear WHY you moved from canon to PENTAX. Would you mind telling me? RJM

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Good point. That kit would be fine for many.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I had reliability issues with several Rebels in a row.

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

Many folks are avid/rabid fans of all things canon. My younger brother was a photographer in the navy, and always said "BUY CANON".When he died, I inherited his canon film cameras. They too, died and getting them repaired, was pound foolish. I bought an eos 30-D, that was o.k. but lenses of a quality I had become used to with PENTAX, Were just ridiculously expensive. A friend of mine sold all of the canon stuff on eBay, and I went back to PENTAX, as I originally started out while in Vietnam Thanks for your "reasoning" response. RJM

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Okay, okay!

We get it. You're a PENTAX fan. That's cool. They make some very nice cameras and lenses.

However the question was about "mirrorless" cameras and I just went looking to see what cameras and lenses of that type Pentax offers. Unless I'm missing something, they don't have any mirrorless models at all, let alone any lenses or accessories for them. So, frankly, I'm at a bit of a loss why you're even responding to this post.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Hi Bud,

For some discussion of Canon M-series, please go to this post from yesterday:

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-492992-1.html

BudsOwl Loc: Upstate NY and New England

Thanks. I had read this thread before and was trying to find out if anyone had also tried the M6 and M100.
BTW, a few people have responded to my post with completely irrelevant information. I asked at the beginning that it be limited to the Canon M series. Sometimes people just think they have to throw in their opinion when in fact it was not requested. Again thank you for a relevant comment.

EdU239 Loc: The Northeast

I have used the M5 and M6. I think they both produce pictures that equal to what I take with my 80D—not surprising since I believe they all use the same sensor and processing software. Ergonomically I much prefer the M5 to the M6 because of the built in EVF. You can indeed use EF/EF-S lenses with the adapter, but I felt anything much beyond Canon’s 22 and 40 pancakes and the lighter 50 mm lenses pretty well messed up their balance and made them hard to handle—worse with the M6 without a viewfinder. If you don’t mind the additional cost, I would suggest renting one or both with a couple of EF-M lenses and the adapter. I still have the M5 on my maybe list, but I have to say I wasn’t wowed by the experience.

BudsOwl Loc: Upstate NY and New England

Thanks, that's the kind of experience info I was looking for.
Bud

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

This is similar to my impression of the M5 (see above).

I think a lot of us are quite frustrated after a decade of waiting for Canon and Nikon to get off their rear ends and develop *serious* mirrorless gear. The catch 22 for both companies is their huge installed bases of legacy lenses. NO Nikon user wants to give up lenses they've had for up to 58 years. NO Canon user wants to give up their L glass. Yet that is what serious mirrorless use often entails.

The M5 with EF/EF-S adapter, mounted with common pro dSLR lenses such as a 24-70mm f/2.8L or 70-200mm f/2.8 L, is off-balance and doesn't respond as quickly as a dSLR. The sensor and processor are about the same as in the EOS 80D, but the 80D is much snappier. I'm sure the M6 balance would be a lot like the M3, which was even more ridiculous with an adapter and dSLR lenses.

Yes, the M5 works reasonably well with native lenses. But Canon makes few native M lenses for a reason: Everyone wants to use their existing dSLR lenses! Nikon has the same sort of problem with the 1 series. So both brands have boxed themselves into a niche market with their mirrorless cameras. The boxing was probably deliberate, but unfortunate for those of us who wanted better.

One of the biggest reasons I switched to mirrorless cameras was to reduce the lens weight in my kit. Using full frame lenses with an M5 won't save significant weight, if you have three or more lenses in a bag. Using APS-C lenses on an M5 won't save significant weight, either. Even using M-series lenses won't save significant weight. So my recommendation for those thinking about the M5 (or M6) is to stick with native M-series lenses if you get a Canon mirrorless. But if you're trying to save weight, you would be better off trading dSLR gear for Panasonic or Olympus Micro 4/3 gear (or buying a separate system).

If weight isn't a big concern, Sony makes full frame and APS-C mirrorless gear that can use Canon lenses well, with the right Metabones Smart Adapter or SpeedBooster. Fujifilm makes excellent APS-C mirrorless gear.

I don't really miss Canon or Nikon, at all, even after using both (off and on) from 1968 to 2012. I'd probably still use one or the other, had they gone all-out to produce mirrorless full frame designs that could use their existing glass, AND had they been as professional about video as Panasonic. I wouldn't have saved any significant weight, but it would have been an easier path. That said, what I have now is an excellent match for my needs. And my kit is 2/3 lighter! Plus, I no longer need to carry a separate video rig when I will be recording both stills and video. THAT saves me about twice the weight.