I like a lot what I see, Miguel, thanks for posting these. Contemplating getting the same combo, for the same reasons.
You're welcome, Milan.
Apart from my interchangeable-lens-cameras - which currently are Lumixes (a wonderful GX7 and a quite cool and smaller GX1) but which previously were Olympus Pens (a PL2 and a PL5) and before that a venerable-but-very-cool Pentax (the K200D), I've spent years juggling a series of different semi-compact single-lens camera that I've wanted mainly as a quality-but-simple take-anywhere camera that I could always bring along. My first - and still one of my favorites though it's now long gone - was an Olympus C-8080, a tank-like beast that had great IQ (back in the early days of digital prehistory) and a great lens - but stupidly s-l-o-w write times and an irritating menu/OS. The C-8080 gave way to an LX1 - then briefly a Samsung EX1/TL500. None of them had one thing which I think I value now more highly than most other characteristics - namely the ability to do close manual focusing.
The LX7 (I bought Ray Sachs's old one from him a few years back) came even closer - and probably still is one of my favorite cameras - close to the C-8080 - but it lacked a dedicated focus ring - and also, apart from the very low ISO's, it didn't quite have the brilliant IQ that my early days shooting both analog and digital Pentaxes, among other things, had gotten me accustomed to. So I said farewell to it. Which only left 2 other candidates recently in my misguided opinion: the Coolpix A - and the new Ricoh GR. I spent a good week shooting with the Coolpix and liked a lot of things about it - but I didn't totally 'bond' with it. And so far, I haven't ever shot with a GR - though a number of photographers that I deeply respect do, and seem to create amazing images with it. Which brings me to -
The EOS M - the little 'M'. I decided to try one out mainly because of the brilliant images another photographer that I really like - Jeff Damron - has been making with his M over the last few years. And it had a lot of potential negatives - or at least weird and unknown aspects - including a touch-screen system - and a lack of the multiple buttons and dials I had gotten used to, especially on my Lumixes. So I was prepared to dislike and dismiss it -
But it's grown on me, steadily. The image quality is quite remarkable. The lens - I only have one, the diminutive 35mm equivalent, the tiny 22mm pancake, is so small that the whole thing's almost pocketable. The manual focusing on it is very cool. And the supposedly slow-as-a-snail focusing isn't all that bad - though I've only used mine with the newer updated firmware. It's also very well built - it feels solid as the proverbial rock to me - more so than a number of other good cameras I've used. But it's really all about the lens I think - and it's got a wonderful one. It isn't obviously quite at the detail level of an RX1 - but it also doesn't have those immense (and for me, unwieldily large) digital full-frame negatives. And so far at least, the digital negatives it produces have a lot of the qualities I like - including the ability to manipulate in many ways - and also rescue from difficult lighting situations. I know a lot of Canon users talk about Canon colors but since I've shot almost exclusively RAW, I can't comment too accurately on that - other than to say they're more than equal - and in some cases clearly nicer - than anything I've gotten from my very good micro 4/3 cameras & lenses - and are the equal of my truly superb Pentax glass from way back when.
And....did I mention....the whole package - camera body + lens - is stupidly affordable these days?
I think it's a great small camera....provided that you don't mind taking the time to learn - and get used to - some of the quirks and oddities of the touchscreen system. But I have - and I quite like it. Hope this helps in your ongoing contemplations.... ;-)