Canon EOS-M Sale at B&H $299+

dougjgreen

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
1,864
Location
San Diego
Real Name
Doug Green
The big reason to get this camera is if you have a bunch of EF lenses. Pickup a 3rd party adapter for cheap and then you can use them with the EOS M with AF.
I totally agree with that - and I said so on the first page of replies.
 

LisaO

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
798
Location
New York Metro Area
Real Name
Lisa
I had one for a day at the original price (quickly returned) and it's not even worth $299. Major focus issues, bad design. Canon has fear of eating into it's DSLR line and designed a bad mirrorless camera.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,397
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Real Name
Nic
Buying one of these just because you already own some EF or EF-S lenses still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You get to combine bulky lenses with a tiny camera that isn't any good at focusing said lenses. Even as a long term Canon user I still don't see the current "M" to be a good proposition.
 

zapatista

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
671
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Real Name
Mike Barber
Surprising that Canon charges $50 less for a good fast prime wide-normal lens than they do for a crappy kit zoom.

Rather notable though is that the reviews basically rip this camera, despite it having excellent IQ. Here's PC Magazine's review, which touts the Panny G5 (Their Editor's Choice), Oly E-PL5, and Sony NEX-5R as all being much better cameras.

Canon EOS M Review & Rating | PCMag.com
I think the 18-55mm is better then the 14-45mm Panasonic. Might want to check the review in PC Mag (that's your source) on the Canon kit zoom lens.
 

dougjgreen

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
1,864
Location
San Diego
Real Name
Doug Green
I think the 18-55mm is better then the 14-45mm Panasonic. Might want to check the review in PC Mag (that's your source) on the Canon kit zoom lens.
It's still a dog slow kit lens with an unimpressively small maximum aperture that limits what it's useful for. And I never claimed that the Panasonic 14-45mm was any good either, for the same reason.
 

zapatista

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
671
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Real Name
Mike Barber
It's still a dog slow kit lens with an unimpressively small maximum aperture that limits what it's useful for. And I never claimed that the Panasonic 14-45mm was any good either, for the same reason.
Well then it's obvious you should buy the EOS M. That way you can get the fastest zoom lens available for a mirrorless camera with auto focus and wouldn't be burdened with the awfully slow Panasonic f2.8 zooms.
 

dougjgreen

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
1,864
Location
San Diego
Real Name
Doug Green
Well then it's obvious you should buy the EOS M. That way you can get the fastest zoom lens available for a mirrorless camera with auto focus and wouldn't be burdened with the awfully slow Panasonic f2.8 zooms.
What makes you think I want any zoom at all in that range? I'd rather shoot fast primes, and the Canon only has one of them.
 

zapatista

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
671
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Real Name
Mike Barber
What makes you think I want any zoom at all in that range? I'd rather shoot fast primes, and the Canon only has one of them.
I'm just messin' with ya. If a really wide aperture isn't a concern, the 18-55mm Canon lens is very good, especially for a $130 white box special. I pretty much shot only primes on m43 but with Fuji (what I'm mainly using these days) I find the 18-55 and 55-200 to be very very good. I'm thinking the IQ on the 55-200 might rival the Olympus 75mm if such a cross-comparison is possible--though obviously not at f1.8. :p
 

sinclair

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
324
Location
Dusty Mexican Border Lands
I find this tempting to get, and sell my GF5 to cover the costs. I've always preferred Canon, and with being able to use EF lenses which cost less than mFT lenses I can see me doing it. We shall see.
 

demiro

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 7, 2010
Messages
2,736
Location
northeast US
buying one of these just because you already own some ef or ef-s lenses still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You get to combine bulky lenses with a tiny camera that isn't any good at focusing said lenses. Even as a long term canon user i still don't see the current "m" to be a good proposition.
yes

i find this tempting to get, and sell my gf5 to cover the costs. I've always preferred canon, and with being able to use ef lenses which cost less than mft lenses i can see me doing it. We shall see.
no
 

Linh

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Messages
1,664
Location
Maryland, US
I had seriously considered this. AF speed seems ok enough for a carry around that isn't my E-M5. My one sticking point is from the few videos I've seen, it seems to have a very long blackout time? LCD goes black while writing I assume and takes quite a bit of time. edit: seems the shot to shot blackout is indeed long, even after review is disabled. However, someone noted switching to continuous mode solves that problem oddly. /edit

Is this a setting somewhere, or just the nature of the beast? I mean, it's only $300... but still, that's $300 away from a 17/1.8, E-M5 'mk2', 12-35, or 35-100 ;)
 

leungw

Deal Hunter
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
411
Location
NJ
Real Name
Willy
Funny. The price at Amazon for the zoom kit is $350. The trade in value is $359.65. So you can buy it and immediately sell it back to Amazon and make $10.
Looks like Amazon adjusted it down to $250 for the zoom kit.

Still $278 trade-in value for the prime kit.
 

ntblowz

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
342
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
$299 for EOS-M with 22mm is a great bargain, as any other fast mirrorless lens is gonna cost more than this.

Anyway I bought it from amazon, just wait for it to be shipped, finally filling the missing 35mm on my setup :D (was thinking of getting 17mm 1.8)
 

uofmtiger

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
65
Location
Memphis
Real Name
Derek
I considered this camera when I bought the EPL5 a couple weeks ago. I have Canon gear, so the ability to mount those lenses with autofocus capabilities was a major draw. However, when I thought about how I would use the camera, I realized that most of my lenses were too big for what I would normally use it for and the number of small lenses that work with it are too few.

The price was closer to what I paid for the EPL5 at that point, so it is hard to say whether I would have made the same choice at $299. This price point does make it a lot easier to manage with the two lenses made for it and an adapter with a lens like the nifty fifty.

I won't buy one, but I can't say it isn't intriguing at this price.
 

zapatista

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
671
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Real Name
Mike Barber
BH Photo still has the 22mm left, I jumped on that train myself. Hopefully the firmware did really fix the autofocus.
It's definitely better, I've been flipping these and continually using one for the last several months. The 22mm f2 is as good as the 17mm f1.8. I'd say a little sharper overall (esp. in the middle wide open) though I like the bokeh with the 17mm a bit more.
 

madogvelkor

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
943
Location
Connecticut
This big price cut may work well for Canon in the long run. If they can get enough people into the system, when they come out with a Mark II and more lenses they can sell to people who are already somewhat invested. Otherwise they risk losing customers to Sony...
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom