Any reviews or impressions of the EF-M 18-150mm yet?

Rocky

EOS 6D MK II
Jul 30, 2010
922
33
11-22 EF-M is a great lens. It is almost as sharp as the 20/2. Definitely, it is sharper than the 18-55.
 

bf

EOS RP
Jul 30, 2014
249
13
To me, 11-22 is even sharper than 22. I usually take 11-22 and 55-200 for hiking. At dark conditions, I take 22, ef-50 stm and my Rokinon 8.5 fisheye.
This 18-150 range is tempting however my next investment will be in m5 or m6 body.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,639
2,153
bholliman said:
Once I pick-up a 11-22 (I'm waiting for them to show up in the refurb sales), I may decide to part with my 15-45. I think I can live with a "gap" between 22 and 55mm since I normally like to shoot wide and long anyway. The 15-45 is a decent lens, but I find I don't use it that much. Its strongest attribute is its size, which works against it a little due to the retracted "parked" position which forces you to go through an additional step to get the camera ready to shoot.
Just to point out (though you're probably aware) that the 11-22 has the same 'problem' with the retracted position and needing to extend the lens before shooting.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,072
141
In DPP, I'm finding that on average, I'm using Contrast +3.0, turning off Noise Reduction (or down significantly for higher ISO shots) and tweaking USM to 4/1/1 to squeeze the most out of 150mm f/6.3 shots. With the 55-200, at 200mm f/6.3 I made similar tweaks, maybe except left NR at default setting. Contrast tweaking was more in the +1 to +2 range, although occasionally it would be more than that. By comparison, with shots from the 11-22, for most shots I left at the default USM setting of 3/4/4 unless there was a focus issue (the lens is quite sharp out of the gate). Contrast, mostly untouched (occasional boosts of < 1 were made in instances).

Of course, this is just reflecting my personal taste. I tend to favor high amounts of detail in my finished product but I know many that don't care for that.
 

slclick

135L
Dec 17, 2013
3,877
1,679
What do M5 owners think of this review...http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/6/14520976/canon-m5-review-mirrorless-camera-sample-photos
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,232
1,588
120
slclick said:
What do M5 owners think of this review...http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/6/14520976/canon-m5-review-mirrorless-camera-sample-photos
Not an owner yet though I did get an extended play with one the other day.

To me the article reads like somebody who knows all the well worn phrases and is so interested in maintaining their position within the 'cool' crowd they came into the exercise with a preconceived idea and maintained it.

I liked this video review, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VikNPzKntDM , though Fro is a bit of a sales rep nowadays part of his persona is to point out stuff that doesn't work. I was particularly impressed with the 13:30 scene and the AF https://youtu.be/VikNPzKntDM?t=810 .

My personal impression after handling the camera? I really liked the size and responsiveness of it, controls AF and menus were all good; hated hated hated the EVF, good lord if they are the future then a ton of money needs to be thrown at them to get them to anything like the quality of a decent viewfinder. It reminded me of looking at a CRT TV set down a plane isle in the dark through an SLi viewfinder. I'll probably still get one though!
 

Eldar

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 14, 2013
3,250
7
www.flickr.com
privatebydesign said:
.... hated hated hated the EVF, good lord if they are the future then a ton of money needs to be thrown at them to get them to anything like the quality of a decent viewfinder. ...
I agree. I dread the day when I have to rely on one of these. I tried the Hasselblad X1D the other day, with some expectation that they had made something decent, but it was absolutely horrible. EVFs need orders of magnitude improvements in resolution and even more in responsiveness. Panning with one of these makes you seasick.
 

AvTvM

EOS 5D MK IV
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
slclick said:
What do M5 owners think of this review...http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/6/14520976/canon-m5-review-mirrorless-camera-sample-photos
I think that this person Amelia is a rather clueless woman. :)

Already reading her first 2 paragraphs leads me to this conclusion. Blaming Canon with link to cheapo, entry-level Canon EOS M10 mixing it with FF-sensored hi-level Sony A7 series and - the "design flare" (!) of those freaking awfully retro-styled Fuji cameras ... enough already! ;D

Then she whines about Canon EF-M lens lineup, the usual "OMG, there is only 7 of them" .. and then she uses the only optically subpar of all EF-M lenses ... 15-45 ... as her sole lens for an entire month and for her review. Did not even mount the 22, 28, 11-22, 18-55, 18-150, 55-200.

*stupid*, Amelia.

That said, also *stupid* Canon* for not putting silent mode/electronic shutter in.
And that down-wilting LCD *is* the dumbest thing seen on a camera in a long time.
 

slclick

135L
Dec 17, 2013
3,877
1,679
After looking into many other MILC systems and deciding to forego the M5 for the screen for one thing (and the creak and the battery and the shutter noise), it's amazing how many brands/models have the down tilting screen and not a flippy.
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
slclick said:
After looking into many other MILC systems and deciding to forego the M5 for the screen for one thing (and the creak and the battery and the shutter noise), it's amazing how many brands/models have the down tilting screen and not a flippy.
Agreed. Not excusing Canon, but obviously the engineering to put the fully articulating screen into a mirrorless body is harder than what it may seem. I found the article relatively accurate in many areas, but with a few key omissions. One glaring one is negatively comparing the M5's EVF to the Sony, which has the same number of pixels and is actually dimmer than that of the Canon. There was little said about the excellence of the touchscreen or touch and drag AF, which Canon has implemented beautifully. Sony's touchscreens are a joke by comparison.

The single biggest reason I haven't bought an M5 already is the lack of 4K video support. I'd like to buy a Sony a6500 for that reason, but some of the ergonomic issues are holding me back (not to mention that I don't trust Sony to support the a6500 any more than six months, after which they'll probably move on to the a6700.)
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,232
1,588
120
AvTvM said:
slclick said:
What do M5 owners think of this review...http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/6/14520976/canon-m5-review-mirrorless-camera-sample-photos
I think that this person Amelia is a rather clueless woman. :)

Already reading her first 2 paragraphs leads me to this conclusion. Blaming Canon with link to cheapo, entry-level Canon EOS M10 mixing it with FF-sensored hi-level Sony A7 series and - the "design flare" (!) of those freaking awfully retro-styled Fuji cameras ... enough already! ;D

Then she whines about Canon EF-M lens lineup, the usual "OMG, there is only 7 of them" .. and then she uses the only optically subpar of all EF-M lenses ... 15-45 ... as her sole lens for an entire month and for her review. Did not even mount the 22, 28, 11-22, 18-55, 18-150, 55-200.

*stupid*, Amelia.

That said, also *stupid* Canon* for not putting silent mode/electronic shutter in.
And that down-wilting LCD *is* the dumbest thing seen on a camera in a long time.
Amelia Holowaty Krales was the photographer for the article, Sean O'Kane was the author.

*stupid* AvTvM
 

slclick

135L
Dec 17, 2013
3,877
1,679
I didn't throw it out there for critique because I agreed with him... it's obvious he is writing from a skewed and biased POV and contradicts himself a couple times at least. I just wanted to hear feedback on those few potentially salient points of what his negative review is based upon. i.e. poor EVF, adapter connection strength, sluggish, poor lcd, bad door design for card & battery, tilty.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,232
1,588
120
slclick said:
I didn't throw it out there for critique because I agreed with him... it's obvious he is writing from a skewed and biased POV and contradicts himself a couple times at least. I just wanted to hear feedback on those few potentially salient points of what his negative review is based upon. i.e. poor EVF, adapter connection strength, sluggish, poor lcd, bad door design for card & battery, tilty.
The EVF is where EVF technology is at this point, the M5 has the same dots as the best Sony cameras and they both look similar, very very different if it is your first EVF rather than optical viewfinder though.

Adapter connection is entirely fallacious, I have the original Canon adapter and have hung my 300 f2.8IS off it, it is rock solid. Having said that, anybody that hangs a multi thousand dollar lens off an M strap is asking for trouble.

As for the rest, essentially built quality questions, I didn't feel the same, this is a sub $1,000 body not a >$3,000 one, I felt the build was not a concern or consideration, that is, I didn't notice it, but then I am a photographer not a reviewer. I opened the battery door and didn't notice anything of concern to me. But my baseline is does it take pictures well and do the ergonomics and general design help me or get in my way.

As for the screen, many other cameras have this same design so it is kinda comical that Canon get this wave of criticism over it whereas everybody else gets 'innovative', tags. I have already seen a couple of practical solutions to work around the tripod use/tilt down 'issue'. For me handling the camera it will be the first camera I own with any hinges so to me the novelty was interesting and useful, however I shoot in portrait orientation a lot and it is entirely useless for that!
 

AvTvM

EOS 5D MK IV
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
privatebydesign said:
AvTvM said:
I think that this person Amelia is a rather clueless woman. :)
...
*stupid*, Amelia.
Amelia Holowaty Krales was the photographer for the article, Sean O'Kane was the author.
*stupid* AvTvM
indeed! :eek:
Thx for the correction and my apologies to Amelia, her images for the review loog good to me. :)
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
privatebydesign said:
For me handling the camera it will be the first camera I own with any hinges so to me the novelty was interesting and useful, however I shoot in portrait orientation a lot and it is entirely useless for that!
I'm also someone who shoots in portrait orientation a lot, mainly for panos. I like the M3, and the ability to look down into the tiltable EVF (although I agree I'd go for a OVF before an EVF any day) but that can't be done in portrait. Also the rear screen design has the same issue, aka M5 and 6. I really like the G1X because it has the flip screen rather than tilt, and works well on a tripod in portrait, more so now I've (more or less) got to grips with the powershot interface, thanks to using the M3 more. Same issues with the G1XII, tilt screen not flip, so I'm hoping a future G1XIII will go back to flip.
 

dak723

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
435
I've owned the M5 for almost two months now. Haven't taken that many pics as the weather hasn't been cooperative, but I agree with others that the review just seems to repeat the usual negative comments as if it is a requirement to put down Canon. Both this and other reviews mention how "out-of-date" the camera already is and would have been a major achievement if only it had been released years ago. This type of argument is ridiculous. It is a perfectly good camera right now. If you are looking for a camera now, it is as good as the competition - as long as there aren't those very few spec items that others may have.

It's funny how this review, as well as others I have seen, mention how good the image quality is - and then sort of dismiss it as not that important. Well, I think for most photographers that is the most important aspect of a camera. They also grudgingly say that it is fun and easy to use. Bingo! The next most important aspect!

Regarding the EVF - yes, it's not the best. It seriously enhances colors. But compared to the Sony A7 and A7 II - I would say it is definitely better. The Sony EVFs are dark. Too dark to accurately get a WYSIWYG exposure indication - one of the advantages (to me anyway) that an EVF provides. At least that was my brief experience with the Sonys before I returned them.

For whatever reason, Olympus has a far better EVF on their OM-D cameras. So, for those waiting for EVFs to radically improve, there is hope. Not sure how Olympus does it, but, in daylight, I often forget that I am looking through an EVF. Color and light/dark comparison to the real scene are almost completely spot on.

If you want the excellent IQ that we can always expect from Canon, and are looking for small and light, then I would recommend the M5. If you are getting the M lenses than In-body stabilization is not needed (something the reviewers always fail to mention). I normally shoot center point and recompose, but moving the focus point on the touch screen is so easy and quick, I am starting to use it. It may not be a Canon innovation (don't know, think someone else may have had it first) but it works great and is a step above much of the competition that Canon is supposed to be lagging behind.
 

bholliman

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 6, 2012
1,473
0
USA
www.flickr.com
Eldar said:
privatebydesign said:
.... hated hated hated the EVF, good lord if they are the future then a ton of money needs to be thrown at them to get them to anything like the quality of a decent viewfinder. ...
I agree. I dread the day when I have to rely on one of these. I tried the Hasselblad X1D the other day, with some expectation that they had made something decent, but it was absolutely horrible. EVFs need orders of magnitude improvements in resolution and even more in responsiveness. Panning with one of these makes you seasick.
I'm certainly not a EVF fan either... After nearly 3 months I'm becoming familiar with the M5's EVF, but its always nice to back to the big, bright OVF on my 5DsR!

dak723 said:
... It's funny how this review, as well as others I have seen, mention how good the image quality is - and then sort of dismiss it as not that important. Well, I think for most photographers that is the most important aspect of a camera. They also grudgingly say that it is fun and easy to use. Bingo! The next most important aspect!
+1 That's what struck me about the review. The important aspects, where the M5 excels, were quickly dismissed and minor perception based arguments (like build quality) were emphasized.

"the M5 is sluggish and cheaply built. It’s missing staples like in-body image stabilization and an electronic shutter. It is surely Canon’s best mirrorless camera to date, but if any other mirrorless camera maker put this out it’d be treated as a major step back. Or, in other words, it’s the best mirrorless camera of four years ago."
I'm not real sure what the author is basing his "sluggish" comments on. To me, performance is pretty snappy. The only significant delay I've experienced is the time it takes to display images on the LCD screen, but that is certainly not a big deal.

I don't have any issues with the M5's build quality. Sure, its not all metal, but it seems pretty solid. Certainly not "cheaply built" in my opinion.

In-body stabilization and electronic shutter would be nice, but I can certainly live without them, especially since most of my lenses are stabilized.

Overall, the author seems to have decided up front that the M5 wasn't good enough and went about finding arguments to prove that rather than looking at things objectively. The M5 certainly has some flaws, but overall, I find it to be a very good 2017 camera.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,232
1,588
120
bholliman said:
dak723 said:
... It's funny how this review, as well as others I have seen, mention how good the image quality is - and then sort of dismiss it as not that important. Well, I think for most photographers that is the most important aspect of a camera. They also grudgingly say that it is fun and easy to use. Bingo! The next most important aspect!
+1 That's what struck me about the review. The important aspects, where the M5 excels, were quickly dismissed and minor perception based arguments (like build quality) were emphasized.
That was the long running complaint I had against the tidal wave of hate the original M drowned under. For the size the IQ was, and still is, exceptionally good!

I don't use it often but whenever I do I am still impressed with the base iso IQ.
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
privatebydesign said:
bholliman said:
dak723 said:
... It's funny how this review, as well as others I have seen, mention how good the image quality is - and then sort of dismiss it as not that important. Well, I think for most photographers that is the most important aspect of a camera. They also grudgingly say that it is fun and easy to use. Bingo! The next most important aspect!
+1 That's what struck me about the review. The important aspects, where the M5 excels, were quickly dismissed and minor perception based arguments (like build quality) were emphasized.
That was the long running complaint I had against the tidal wave of hate the original M drowned under. For the size the IQ was, and still is, exceptionally good!

I don't use it often but whenever I do I am still impressed with the base iso IQ.
that is very true. I was actually surprised at how well it did when I compared it to the M5 and 80D.
 

LesC

EOS RP
Jun 27, 2013
267
67
Essex, UK
500px.com
I've often thought it might be nice to downsize/reduce weight form my current most used combo of the 6D + 24-70 F2.8 but the problems with the M5 for me are a) the EVF - although I could probably get used to it but mainly b) the lack of really good lenses so far.

Putting and adaptor & L series glass on the M5 would no doubt give very good IQ but defeats the point of having a small body. If I really want a small body, I use my 100D/SL1 - about the same size as the M5 but still a real dslr. I do have the original EOS M (got it for next to nothing) but very rarely use it...

If/when Canon or someone else produces superb lenses for their CSC's & the EVF's improve then I'll reconsider - I'm sure it's just a matter of time.