EOS M for taking photos of children?

[Ariel Ke]

Hello,

I have a 1.5 years old deughter and I'm looking for a camera with good image quality (until now I had only point and shoot cameras). It seems that the EOS M can deliver great image quality, but I read it is not good for children because of it's slow autofocus (even after the firmware update). Other options are the Olympus E-PM2 or the Sony NEX-3n, but from what I saw I prefer the Canon's colors, and it seems it's image quality is great (I won't be able to buy more lenses right now, and the canon's kit lens also seems to be better than the competitors). Is it really that bad for children? Have you experienced taking young children's photos with it?

 

[Jonathan Brady]

Good technique and the proper situation would allow you to get more keepers, but it's probably not the best solution available. Will it be able to keep up with a 1.5 year old running around, no. But will it capture images where a 1.5 year old is playing quietly by themselves, or even in a group but mostly stationary, etc.? Yeah!

I've tried to capture my 1 year old crawling across the floor (she's pretty fast) and it doesn't keep up. Perhaps with better technique or maybe even different settings it would. But I haven't had it long and I've been using it for static shots. I pull out my 60D when I need speed.

So, it's not an awful solution, but it's not the most versatile either.

Does the above sound like the types of moments you were trying to capture?

 

[Ariel Ke]

Jonathan Brady wrote:

Good technique and the proper situation would allow you to get more keepers, but it's probably not the best solution available. Will it be able to keep up with a 1.5 year old running around, no. But will it capture images where a 1.5 year old is playing quietly by themselves, or even in a group but mostly stationary, etc.? Yeah!

I've tried to capture my 1 year old crawling across the floor (she's pretty fast) and it doesn't keep up. Perhaps with better technique or maybe even different settings it would. But I haven't had it long and I've been using it for static shots. I pull out my 60D when I need speed.

So, it's not an awful solution, but it's not the most versatile either.

Does the above sound like the types of moments you were trying to capture?

Yes, these are part of the moments I want to capture. I'm used not to be able to take picture of my child moving with the camera I have right now. Maybe the EOS M really isn't the right camera for me, but it's overall quality is really appealing. Thank you for your answer.

 

[007peter]

I'm the original poster in your m43 forum thread who much prefer canon color. I decided not to respond to your thread in m43 as I don't want to cause anguish. Having said that....

Canon EOS-M AF is slow - I cannot recommend it for shooting toddlers. I have M43 + NEX + EOS-M, and canon is easily the slowest of them all...even with firmware 2.02.

Canon color is not only amazing, but highly tweakable via picture style. Canon Picture Style is the most underrated feature few taken its time to take advantage of it.

1. You can download different Picture Styles to suit your needs. (copy & past from my old thread)

STANDARD

View: original size

CLEAR picture styles

View: original size

• TWILIGHT:

View: original size

View: original size

PORTRAIT

View: original size

STUDIO

View: original size

SNAPSHOT

View: original size

2. You can also create your own Picture Styles to suit your needs. Here I created one to mimmick Nikon D40's vivid mode. see my Animated GIF of before/after

3. You can replicate any camera, any film look. Do you like the look of old Kodak Chrome Film or Fuji Velvia? If so, you can just download them and recreate its looks.

 

[Jonathan Brady]

Here's one I took yesterday that I might have been able to capture with the M, but was instead using the 60D.

I was using the 60D because, although my daughter was throwing up and having diarrhea yesterday which caused me to be home with her, she was NOT acting like she was sick! She was crawling everywhere and in HYPER SPEED. So, had I waited for this exact moment with the M, I probably could have snagged this same shot. But, due to her hyperactivity yesterday, I didn't feel comfortable with it so I grabbed ol' faithful instead. And I'm someone who has been using the M 10:1 vs my 60D since I bought it.

So the M may be the right camera for you if you're willing to be patient and potentially miss out on some shots.

Shot details in case anyone is interested:

40mm STM (I have the adapter so I truly could have used the M)

Shot in RAW in Aperture Priority mode, 1/80, f/2.8, Auto ISO with a max of 800 and the camera chose 160. I could have shot in manual and upped the shutter speed to freeze her action and still had an acceptable ISO but I wasn't going for an action stopping picture, I was going for what you see above. Shot in Faithful but converted to Monochrome. DLO applied, +1/3 brightness, -2 contrast (I find Canon contrast to be too strong for my taste), +2 shadows, unsharp mask at 4, 7, 4 (strength, fineness, threshold)

I hope this sort of presentation is helpful to show you what you can, might be able to, and can't achieve with the M. Like I said, I probably could have achieved this shot with the M (especially with more practice and comfort) but just didn't feel comfortable yet (after a month of owning it).

 

[Dedcakes]

It seems like he's only considering 3 mirror less bodies. In that's the case, buy the M w/ the kit lens because you'll likely enjoy it more than the EP-L2 and NEX3n.

It may be underrated, but IS in the kit lens will help you take better videos of your family and kids. I find video just as important when I'm looking back at the kids..,

Fast, zippity, shots, may be difficult, but with tracking AF and/or some careful planning, you may learn how to use the M in those situations. It will be better than your typical P&S.

Ultimately, taking pics of a child running, in the dark, is overrated. IMO.

 

[Jonathan Brady]

It seems like he's only considering 3 mirror less bodies. In that's the case, buy the M w/ the kit lens because you'll likely enjoy it more than the EP-L2 and NEX3n.

It may be underrated, but IS in the kit lens will help you take better videos of your family and kids. I find video just as important when I'm looking back at the kids..,

Fast, zippity, shots, may be difficult, but with tracking AF and/or some careful planning, you may learn how to use the M in those situations. It will be better than your typical P&S.

Ultimately, taking pics of a child running, in the dark, is overrated. IMO.

Actually LOL'd at the "taking pics of kids running in the dark is overrated" part. Completely agree. Many people buy for features they'll practically never use instead of focusing on buying something that will perform exceptionally well for the vast majority of their uses.

 

[JamesErik1971]

few people realize how tall of an order photographing "just my kids" indoors really is, especially since these folks usually don't want (or know how) to use flash. this type of photography is essentially indoor sports photography.

depending on your surroundings (ceiling height, lighting) you will probably need to drop serious cash to reach results far superior to a point and shoot

you need a DSLR, and you need a good one. 60d/d7100 or better. you also need nice lenses. fast primes for no flash, 2.8 zooms for flash with fast AF.

you can get buy with an OMD, but IMO the high ISO is ok at best.

the eos m is an ultra compact high quality portrait and landscape camera to me

I use nikon d800s (plural, not "s") for everything else

 

[Optimus47]

Ariel Ke wrote:

Hello,

I have a 1.5 years old deughter and I'm looking for a camera with good image quality (until now I had only point and shoot cameras). It seems that the EOS M can deliver great image quality, but I read it is not good for children because of it's slow autofocus (even after the firmware update). Other options are the Olympus E-PM2 or the Sony NEX-3n, but from what I saw I prefer the Canon's colors, and it seems it's image quality is great (I won't be able to buy more lenses right now, and the canon's kit lens also seems to be better than the competitors). Is it really that bad for children? Have you experienced taking young children's photos with it?

Taking pictures of kids is tough because... well, they are very unpredictable...!

If you are really, really worried about speed, then, unfortunately, a DSLR is still the best way to go in terms of performance. My friend even has trouble with his D300 taking shots of his speedy kids.

However, you are going to be able to take more pics of your kids in "calmer moments" with something like the EOS M, because it is so small and portable.

Plus, pre-focusing, faster shutter speeds and better technique will probably allow you to compensate for slower focus speed (in some cases).

I haven't used the other two cameras you mentioned. I'd be surprised if they are significantly faster or slower than each other...

Other factors to consider:

Micro Four Thirds will have more lens selection than either EOS M or NEX.

NEX-3n should have better low light than the EPM2.

(Equal low light to the EOS M.)

I'd decide based on which camera you feel more comfortable using, not solely AF speed.

 

[Jonathan Brady]

Ariel Ke wrote:

Hello,

I have a 1.5 years old deughter and I'm looking for a camera with good image quality (until now I had only point and shoot cameras). It seems that the EOS M can deliver great image quality, but I read it is not good for children because of it's slow autofocus (even after the firmware update). Other options are the Olympus E-PM2 or the Sony NEX-3n, but from what I saw I prefer the Canon's colors, and it seems it's image quality is great (I won't be able to buy more lenses right now, and the canon's kit lens also seems to be better than the competitors). Is it really that bad for children? Have you experienced taking young children's photos with it?

Taking pictures of kids is tough because... well, they are very unpredictable...!

If you are really, really worried about speed, then, unfortunately, a DSLR is still the best way to go in terms of performance. My friend even has trouble with his D300 taking shots of his speedy kids.

However, you are going to be able to take more pics of your kids in "calmer moments" with something like the EOS M, because it is so small and portable.

Plus, pre-focusing, faster shutter speeds and better technique will probably allow you to compensate for slower focus speed (in some cases).

I haven't used the other two cameras you mentioned. I'd be surprised if they are significantly faster or slower than each other...

Other factors to consider:

Micro Four Thirds will have more lens selection than either EOS M or NEX.

NEX-3n should have better low light than the EPM2.

(Equal low light to the EOS M.)

I'd decide based on which camera you feel more comfortable using, not solely AF speed.

 

[dboreham]

The EOS-M is a particularly poor camera for photographing children. It blacks out the viewfinder image for more than a second after each shot. This makes it very hard to capture the right pose, expression, smile etc in a fast-moving subject. I'd look at a DSLR: pretty much any DSLR will be much better than the EOS-M for this purpose but a faster model such as the 7D/70D/60D/50D will be better than the Rebels due to the quicker shot-to-shot time and larger buffer.

 

[wootang]

I have three small kids and I find that the EOS-M is not best suited for that sort of photography. I would advise a small rebel; SL1, T2i, T3i, etc. It will focus faster and there will be no shutter lag or long black out times between shots. You won't need a $1500 lens either. Just bump the ISO up to 800 and use the pop up flash and the kit lenses and be happy. A Rebel-sized camera with the kit lens is not THAT much larger than the EOS-M and the 18-55.

That said, the EOS-M is a wonderful camera (especially with the 22 mm prime) for a bunch of other photography. I have one.

I also tried-and really tried to love- the Olympus E-PM2 as well. It focuses MUCH quicker (with the kits lens) than the EOS M. It has impressive noise characteristics at 1600/3200 ISO. BUT as a JPEG shooter the majority of the time (especially for the kiddos around the house/yard/pool) I found I could never dial in the Olympus' JPEGs to my liking. I found it had troubles with backlit scenes; skies are burnt out but the trees are dark. Colors were fine in Natural mode, but to "cartoony" otherwise. Just to be clear, I didn't mess with RAW files, because I didn't want a small camera of this type to add any RAW processing to a pretty easy workflow - which is take good Canon JPEGs and then email/load to FB, etc.

The two cameras expose totally different, so it is difficult to compare Apples to Apples. For example, the Canon prefers lower shutter speeds to the Olympus (primarily indoors). Canon goes for 1/30 and the Olympus with choose 1/60 just about every time. Even when I stop down the 22 mm lens the Canon will still choose a 1/30 shutter speed but my bump up the ISO a stop to compensate.

By the way, I have owned a 60D for about a year, I still enjoy using it. I have the STANDARD picture style tweaked a hair and find it works great for 99% of what I do. The EOS-M take the same great images that I am used to with the 60D and I find that for the most part they are interchangable.

With that said, if your goal is to only buy a small mirrorless camera, I would look at the Sony 3n and the Olympus E-PM2 due to their quicker focus times. Otherwise any recent DSLR with give you more "keepers" of the kiddos.

I re-sold my E-PM2 and I'm keeping the EOS-M as a fun hobby camera. Of course the 60D has its place as well!



View attachment 5510



I will attempt to load a couple of samples.

 

[Wayne Larmon]

JamesErik1971 wrote:

few people realize how tall of an order photographing "just my kids" indoors really is, especially since these folks usually don't want (or know how) to use flash. this type of photography is essentially indoor sports photography.

depending on your surroundings (ceiling height, lighting) you will probably need to drop serious cash to reach results far superior to a point and shoot

you need a DSLR, and you need a good one. 60d/d7100 or better. you also need nice lenses. fast primes for no flash, 2.8 zooms for flash with fast AF.

^This.

 

[Optimus47]

Ariel Ke wrote:

Hello,

I have a 1.5 years old deughter and I'm looking for a camera with good image quality (until now I had only point and shoot cameras). It seems that the EOS M can deliver great image quality, but I read it is not good for children because of it's slow autofocus (even after the firmware update). Other options are the Olympus E-PM2 or the Sony NEX-3n, but from what I saw I prefer the Canon's colors, and it seems it's image quality is great (I won't be able to buy more lenses right now, and the canon's kit lens also seems to be better than the competitors). Is it really that bad for children? Have you experienced taking young children's photos with it?

I almost hate suggesting it, but another alternative would be the Nikon 1 System.

Pros:

Super fast focusing

Responsive

Compact

Cons:

1" sensor compared to APS-C

Expense (unless you get an older model V1)

Low light not as good

*******

Despite its drawbacks, people seem to love the camera.

If you are not printing large, it may be good enough

and better than standard compact cameras.

 

[missitnoonan]

I have the EosM and a 2.5 year old boy. It has it's uses, but really can't compare to my 60D for general usefulness. Autofocus is too slow for action and the buffer depth for Raw burst shooting isn't good (4 or 5 shots and the buffer is really slow to write to the card). That said it's nice to have a smaller system sometimes and the price of the system makes me more willing to bring it to some places I might damage it (beach).

I'm also a big user of flash indoors (430ExII) and I don't find any of the options for the M appealing. I tried my 270EX and it's just not all that comfortable, the 90EX just doesn't speak to me.

One thing I really like is it's use as a video camera with the 18-55. Small and great picture quality.

I wouldn't buy it as my only system for kids. As an addition for some with a DSLR already? Total win.

 

[MisterPootieCat]

Ariel Ke wrote:

Hello,

I have a 1.5 year old daughter and I'm looking for a camera with good image quality (until now I had only point and shoot cameras). It seems that the EOS M can deliver great image quality, but I read it is not good for children because of it's slow autofocus (even after the firmware update). Other options are the Olympus E-PM2 or the Sony NEX-3n, but from what I saw I prefer the Canon's colors, and it seems it's image quality is great (I won't be able to buy more lenses right now, and the canon's kit lens also seems to be better than the competitors). Is it really that bad for children? Have you experienced taking young children's photos with it?

If you're serious about capturing active kids you need to move away from cameras based on CDAF. All of the cameras you've mentioned are slower to achieve AF than even the lowest priced DSLR's. For a bit more money (maybe even less depending on the MILC system) you can move up to a DSLR with all of the nice things that you'll need to capture the kids as they scoot around the house. I own the EOS M and can't imagine trying to capture a moving target like a small child consistently. Sure, there are techniques that might help overcome the shortcomings of MILC but why handicap yourself?

If I was just entering the DSLR market on a budget I'd be looking at the following cameras: Nikon D3100/D3200/D5200, Canon T3/T4i/SL1. Since I'm a Canon shooter my first pick would be the T4i (it's the bang for your buck thing) or the SL1 with the excellent 18-55 STM. A nice flash with bounce capability would be high on my priorities too. I would add a 55-250 zoom telephoto later so I could capture my kids discretely from a distance.

The EOS M at current prices is a hard thing to pass up but for what you're trying to do it would be more of an exercise in frustration than anything else. And all of the MILC's are a system requiring an investment in lenses (some are quite expensive) and flashes. At the end of the day they can cost as much or more than a nice entry level DSLR system.

 

[JamesErik1971]

You are talking pop-up direct flash, jpegs, auto modes, and high ISO on smaller sensors.

to me those results are not significantly better than a point and shoot would provide.

dslr snapshots:

 

[JamesErik1971]

one last one

this failed to upload in the last post

VSCO Polaroid 690 from RAW

 

[tomtom50]

Ariel Ke wrote:

Hello,

I have a 1.5 years old deughter and I'm looking for a camera with good image quality (until now I had only point and shoot cameras). It seems that the EOS M can deliver great image quality, but I read it is not good for children because of it's slow autofocus (even after the firmware update). Other options are the Olympus E-PM2 or the Sony NEX-3n, but from what I saw I prefer the Canon's colors, and it seems it's image quality is great (I won't be able to buy more lenses right now, and the canon's kit lens also seems to be better than the competitors). Is it really that bad for children? Have you experienced taking young children's photos with it?

I have used all three and own a 3n and an EOS-m. And I have a toddler.

Of the cameras you cite the EPM-2 is far and away best for fast-moving kids. Touch to shoot is practically instantaneous.

You might ask why I don't have the EPM-2 since I have a toddler... The answer is that I have an RX100 which is very fast and I use it to photograph my son. I use the mirrorless camera for slower subjects. If I had mirrorless only it would be the EPM-2, which is truly blazing fast.

 

[vrot01]

A rebel T4i and a 50mm f1.8 can be had for under $500... It is a better choice for kid/low light/shallow focus shots than any of the cameras you mentioned... Plus this combo is a great means to learn photography...