EOS M, what's the point?

Started Sep 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
WT21 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,895
Personal answer. but here's a macro idea

Peter63 wrote:

I started with the 22 kit and love it for the compact form combined with great IQ. I bought the 18-55 but don't use it much because it makes the camera too big for a belt pouch. I took both lenses and M hiking last weekend and loved the light weight and capability but realized I want better macro ability, extension tubes just aren't working that well for me. So now I think I should get the EF adapter but then someone pointed out that the M plus adapter weigh the same as an SL1. I would rather have the SL1 with the efs 18-55 stm (same weight as efm 18-35 stm) and bring my 60 macro.

So now I am back to using the M with the 22 as an everyday cam in a belt pouch. I won't give up my DSLR, and I still want to buy a 70d and /or a 6d.

So I guess my question is for anyone who is keeping a DSLR and an M, when do you take the M instead of the DSLR and why? Is it weight, size, stealth, or something else?

Get a $50 legacy macro + adapter. Like an FD 50mm 3.5, or a Takumar or something. Cheap, and macro focus often needs manual anyway. A bonus (unlike tubes) is that you get a fun lens for portrait and other uses. I used MF macros on my m43 system when I had it. A lot of fun, and usually <$100 total with adapter. You can usually sell the lens again later with little or no loss, and the old lenses (e.g. Takumar) have some pretty different character to them. FDs have nice color and contrast.

 WT21's gear list:WT21's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony a6000 Sony FE 70-200 F4 Sony FE 28mm F2
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow