EOS-M AF with adapted EOS lenses (incl pics with 40 STM)

Discussion in 'Canon' started by wt21, Oct 3, 2013.

  1. wt21

    wt21 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 15, 2010
    How many people assume EOS-M AF is terrible?

    Some still, right? But most people would begrudgingly say it's OK for still objects, but only with the firmware mind you!

    Well, I wouldn't disagree. But, for still life, landscape, etc. it is fast enough. It's also fast enough for portrait, IMO. Just not moving kids or action/sports.

    OK, well, how many folks know that it's horrible with adapted EOS lenses. Everyone, right?

    Well, turns out -- wrong.

    I finally gave in and got the fotodiox EOS to EOS-M adapter. I've now been able to test the native 22mm and the native 11-22, and also my EOS lens collection: 40mm 2.8 STM (bought this with the adapter), 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and my old 70-210 USM zoom. Also a Tamron 28-75/2.8.

    I am very surprised to report that the 40mm STM focuses just as fast as the 22mm. I would even say the camera may focus faster than the XE1 + 35/1.4 from Fuji (though I no longer have the Fuji, so I can't compare directly). The 11-22 might focus a bit faster than both (then again, it doesn't have to far to move to focus at small aperture wide angle).

    But even MORE surprisingly is that my 85/1.8 and 50/1.4 (both USM) focus just as fast as the 40. Even my 70-210USM focuses fast, though it seems more prone to miss focus than the others. Lastly, my Tamron 28-75/2.8 focuses a little slower than the others, but it's a micro-motor and not USM, and focuses slower than the other lenses even on my 6D, so no surprise there.

    I hope Canon releases more pancakes for their EOS-M 2 (to be announced soon, rumor has it), but even if they don't, and if you have a collection of EOS lenses, the M is perfectly serviceable AF for hiking, landscape, still like, walk-about type shooting.

    I don't know how often I'll use the other lenses, but the 40/2.8 STM with the adapter (i.e. the two together) is just a little smaller than the Canon 50mm 1.8 plastic fantastic lens.

    To put it another way, it's also a bit smaller (lens + adapter) than the PL25. If you have a body+lens smaller than the size of the EPM + PL25, I would say that's pretty darn compact. And still super affordable (EOS-M + 22 = $300 plus $50 fotodiox and $140 40mm lens = $500 for two very nice lenses on a pocket mirrorless body)

    Two this morning with the 40/2.8 STM

    20131003-20131003-IMG_6461 by wt2100, on Flickr

    20131003-20131003-IMG_6467 by wt2100, on Flickr
    • Like Like x 5
  2. Fiddler

    Fiddler Veteran

    Dec 5, 2010
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    I borrowed one for a day, and thought it was a nice little camera. It has excellent build quality and has a straightforward and intuitive UI. This was before the firmware update, and the AF wasn't as bad as a lot of people were saying. Haven't tried it since.
  3. drd1135

    drd1135 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    Lexington, Virginia
    It's a weird mix of a camera. The AF is slow and the huge focus area can make selective focus difficult and there's no possibility of an EVF. OTOH, it small and well made, the touchscreen interface is pretty intuitive, there are some nice lenses like the 22 (nice to hear the adapted ones work), and it has a big sensor that produces really nice raw files. It was too expensive and unfinished when it first came out and it got clobbered in the reviews. If you mostly shoot stationary or slow moving stuff, however, it's a pretty powerful little camera that produces really fine images.
    • Like Like x 2