Joining the Dark Side (Canon EOS-M)

Just over 18 months ago a bought a used Nikon 1 V1 kit with 10 mm lens. It cost $275. Yesterday (and several hundred dollars of Nikon 1 gear later) I bought a "scratch and dent" Canon EOS-M kit with 22mm kit lens for $185.

As I write this, the Nikon V1 + 10 mm and the Canon EOS-M + 22 mm in good condition can be found for around $230-260. Stripped of any price differential, we can fairly ask which is the better camera. I was curious to find the answer for myself, so at a price I could not refuse I picked one up.

This is the first time I have bought a Canon camera. Ever.

My thoughts going into this:

- I love the look and feel of the EOS-M, at least with the 22mm pancake. It's a small body but the simplified interface means it doesn't become fiddly with lots of tiny buttons. Compared to the V1 (which on the whole I have grown fond of) it is sleeker, grippier, and even more tightly put together.

- Not having the kit zoom is no loss to me. A physical zoom ring doesn't match well with a camera which you must hold out away from your face to use. (Learnt that lesson when I had the Nikon 1 J1 and 10-30.) 35 mm eq. F2.0 of the STM 22 is the same as the Fuji X100. Nice FL for indoor use and travel. Sensor should support cropping to "standard" 50mm eq. in a pinch. Balances the camera nicely.

- Post firmware update, I wonder how bad this thing is going to perform vs. my V1? I am willing to compromise, but I will not tolerate "unusable". The touch screen is a bit of a concern. As long as metering and program lines are semi-intelligent I don't mind leaving the camera in program auto and getting on with it, so, like the V1, the absence of a true mode dial would not be especially vexing.

- Given its strengths and weaknesses vs. the V1, namely larger sensor but no viewfinder, I'm thinking this camera might find a reasonable use case as an evening "pocket" camera. For times where I'm still in casual mode (no dSLR), but the low LV means the CX sensor / slow lens combination of my V1 has ran out of headroom. Poor mans Coolpix A/Ricoh GR. Or, an even more evil comparison: the 35/2 of a Sony RX-1 for 1/10th the price.

- It could also be a pretty decent camcorder. Like the V1 it has a mic input jack, so I can use my ME-1 directly on the hot shoe.

- No loss to me if I just play around with it until November then flip it on ebay.

Will update with a hands on in a few days.

It will be interesting to see what you say. I just sold my EOS-M and bought a V1. I like to take candids - or unposed portraits - and the Canon was too slow and too hit or miss for that, even after the firmware update.

It's hard to image two cameras designed for basically the same purpose being as radically different in operation as these two are.


The Nikon V1 and its evil twin, EOS-M with 22mm STM.

Coolest thing about the EOS-M after 5h: the touchscreen. That moment where I was staring at the image review, wondering how to zoom, and came up with the idea "maybe pinch-to-zoom works" ... and it did! Generally, from selecting the focus point area to adjusting settings, the touchscreen is really nice to use. There are some inconsistencies and the "back" command is not consistent over the interface, but its generally nice. The quality of the LCD screen itself is excellent.

Worst thing about the EOS-M after 5h: the menu. Or rather menus. Nikon 1 does it the right way: one menu, context sensitive with memory. Three sub menus: review, photo/movie, and setup. The Canon splits all this into three completely independent places: the MENU button is actually just the setup menu with the low level configurations. Since that is rarely used it is a waste of a nice button if you ask me. The "Q" menu (center button of the 4-way controller) gets you to most of the shooting adjustments, from noise reduction to AF mode, but NOT the PASM selection. The INFO button cycles though the display modes, one of which like the Nikon info screen, where you can get to the PASM commands, ISO, and other direct image variables. You can also get to a fair number of things from the regular rear LCD display, by touching on the various icons scattered around the edge of the screen. Obviously its a learning curve which can be mastered eventually, but it strikes me as needlessly complex and counter-intuitive: the MENU key is not the menu you actually want 90% of the time, that's the Q button or INFO, depending on which setting it is you are interested in changing. Geez. On a positive note it is very flexible at the low level, there seems to usually be multiple ways of doing any given task, and plenty of configurations to play with buries deep in the setup menu.

"Hurry up and wait."

The EOS-M (hereafter just "M" or "Canon") subscribes to the idea of setting up a shot carefully, rather than shoot-reshoot or burst-and-pick-later. It's not fast. In fact it really does seem a throwback to the "old days" of digital photography, especially compacts. After taking the photo the camera basically locks itself down for a couple of seconds. Add to this the slow-but-sure working of the autofocus and you have what can be considered the direct opposite of an action camera.

The dirty little secret of Nikon 1 is the actual amount of real creative control afforded by the CX sensor and small-aperture lenses is almost nil. The constraints of keeping the ISO reasonably low for low noise means the shutter speed and aperture are fixed at the min/max values respectively, most of the time. And there's no DOF control, or rather the DOF is fixed by the subject distances rather than controlled by the camera. So there's little point having all these much-praised "manual controls" on this kind of camera. All the Nikon 1 photographer normally needs to worry about is exposure and composition.

The M, on the other hand, is a full ASPC sensor and F2 lens, so picking the combination of shutter speed and aperture is something you will need to pay attention to and change frequently. Thus it is fortunate that the ISO/PASM/EV/main variable(shutter speed, aperture, or program shift) are quite nicely implemented. Mode selection is achieved by three taps to the touchscreen. That's actually quicker and more direct than the V1. EV is less than ideal though. The button press mechanics is the same as the V1, but the on-screen indication is hard to follow.

Overall the interface feels competent, but cluttered.

Battery life seems horrible. Rated just over 200 shots: small battery and large, bright LCD = often dead camera.

The M is 405g fully loaded out, my V1 with the grip and GPS is about 550g. For practical purposes, in terms of what bag they'll fit in, and when or if you'd want to carry them, they are the same. The M is sleeker, and has better ergonomics is that I feel no need to attach a grip, though the V1 *with* the grip offers more positive handling overall.

Most of my photography does not involve chasing things. As long as the subject stays still for about 2 seconds, the M's autofocus system will work fine, and for me that's almost all the time. Conversely, the M's standout feature: adjustment of the AF area via touchscreen, is truly useful, intuitive, and just all-around really great. Saves having to half-press-recompose all the time, and is much less frustrating.

The huge tradeoff is the absence of a viewfinder. I just find I get lazy in my composition without one. I don't know why, but that's what always happens. So I am a creature of peculiar needs, but a viewfinder is ultimately a required feature for me. The rear LCD is really good though, about as good as the come. It does wash out in bright sunlight (and conversely stays too bright in dim light) but neither extreme is a dealbreaker.

Overall then my first impressions are mixed. I feel I am using a camera which was not designed with my needs in mind, or rather tacked on those options at the end over multiple layers of controls and settings catering to everyone from Aunt May to Johnny Smartphone to Canon Man. the result is a camera with an identity crisis, that does a lot of things, and many of them well, but is riddled with duplication, complexity, and inconsistency.

A concrete example would be the tiny size of the font used to display the shutter speed and aperture on the LCD, and how those - to me - vital numbers are mired in visual clutter of little used "hot buttons" or status icons.

Yet at the end of the day we still have an APSC sensor squeezed into a Powershot body. That amount of pocketable power cannot be dismissed easily, both for low light shooting and for DOF control. Next up, getting to grips with what the sensor and lens are capable of.

The Nikon V1 has DISP, the Canon has MENU. The Canon has INFO, the Nikon has MENU.

A simple reversal of the position? Not so fast.

On Nikon 1 cameras, DISP toggles the display mode (clean/cluttered) and, on the V1, also turns the LCD off for the times you only care to use the EVF. MENU is, as I wrote earlier, the central repository for all the settings not otherwise accessible from the physical buttons on the camera.

Now, I want to make one thing very clear here, because this is the key to the whole way that Nikon, and Nikon 1 especially, works: Every single setting and control on the V1 has a single location on the camera. If its in the menu, its in the menu, if its a camera button its a camera button. The V1 was criticised for not having a quick menu or configurable buttons, but I stoutly defended that decision: learn how to use the camera. The interface is clean, concise, and fluid once you learn where everything is.

Canon is similar to Pentax in that it uses a quick menu in addition to the main menu, to provide quick access to frequently used controls. Unlike Pentax, it also has a touchscreen. The quick menu items are a duplicate subset of the main menu items, and the touchscreen duplicates the physical buttons on the camera. For example the quick menu button (the OK button of the four way) is also a "button" on the touchscreen. Etc. Not only is it unnecessary clutter, the camera with 6 ways to do any given task adds a layer of hesitation: even if you learn where everything is, there's still a pause where you think about which way you want to go about it.

Which brings me at last to the WTF moment, the facepalm-inducing decision which I cannot for the life of me see why they did it:

The INFO button is sorta-kinda like the Nikon 1 DISP button. There are three levels of clutter, (clean, mild, and "the works") and, at last, the "info" screen proper which is a summary of all settings, and doubles as a second quick menu as all the displayed items are "live", touching them brings up the relevant settings.

The clean screen is the one directly before the info screen, and the info screen can be dismissed by a half press of the shutter. So obviously the clean screen is hugely preferred: you can get to the info/setting screen and back again with one button press.

But, the clean display doesn't show the shutter speed or aperture, so you can't adjust then, until you half press and hold the shutter. Rotating the rear control wheel while half pressing the shutter is an act of dexterity I am not willing to entertain. Instead, I use the "mild" info screen, which enables the aperture/shutter speed to be adjusted without holding down the shutter button.

But, but... now to get to and from the info screen, I have to first press the INFO button three times (mild->cluttered->clean->info) and, dismissing the info screen with a half press, I an stuck back to "clean", so to return to mild I have to press the INFO button times (clean->info->mild) cycling through the info screen for a second time on my way there.

So that's a total of seven button presses to go from my preferred display mode to the info screen and back again. Each and every time.

#yougottabekiddingme


EOS-M rear view, note MENU and INFO buttons.

Just in case anyone was thinking that this level of stupidity was an inevitable consequence of the physical design, here's a simple fix that involves nothing but changing the button functionality.

1. Make the Q menu access icon persistent across all three display modes.

2. Re-assign the center button of the four way controller from Q menu to "INFO" and make it do nothing but call up and dismiss the info screen.

3. Re-label the INFO button to DISP, and have it just cycle through the three display modes.

Getting rid of the redundancy associated with having the Q menu in two different places frees up an extra physical button, allowing the doubled-up function of the INFO button to be split into coherent single feature controls.

So now its obvious: the Q menu is "here", the info screen is "there", and you cycle through display modes "this way". This simple change, easily done in firmware, would make the camera far, far more intuitive and enjoyable to use. All that was needed was the confidence to drop the redundancy between the LCD touchscreen and the physical controls.

I'm going to go post this now on the Canon forum and see what they think...

The Nikon V1 and EOS-M are arguably the two worst received cameras in recent memory. They certainly got thrashed. Both, I'm coming to think, unfairly ... though the very high initial asking price certainly did them no favors.

The V1 trades off intractability for simplicity. But the combination of small sensor/slow lens means that in practice Program Auto + Auto ISO generally gives me the settings I want, and EV/program shift can get me where I need to go if I need a small adjustment. I don't feel a need to go in and control the camera settings explicitly. I still think it's the right interface for the camera.

The EOS-M is different. In program auto and auto ISO I generally end up at ISO100 F2, when really most of the time I'd want ISO400 and F4. The program line, in other words, runs to max aperture before raising the ISO. That's not what I want, so I find my default now with the EOS-M is manual ISO and aperture priority. I take back control, in other words.

Moving away from the program auto / program shift paradigm, the interface becomes much less of a hassle. Where the V1 has the ISO buried in the menu, there are four (count 'em) separate ways to quickly adjust the ISO on the EOS-M: directly touching the ISO screen icon, the quick menu, the info screen, and, a custom setting, mapping ISO to the delete button on the 4-way controller. And the "clean view" display (the nice one which has one-button access to the info screen) pulls up the aperture setting as soon as the turn the rear control dial.

Operated in that way, I find I achieve a comfortable level of fluidity using EOS-M. The EOS-M is meant to be controlled, the V1 meant to be left alone to do its job.

On other fronts, the AF is slow but extremely reliable: it takes about half a second, but it almost always locks properly in that time. The LCD is just amazing, 180 viewing angles, its almost enough to convert me (I still think holding a camera out in front of you to take photos is unforgivably dorky though.)

Outside of battery life, my last concern is image quality. The sensor feels "old". If the V1 nominally compares to the D200/D80 (pretty exceptional considering its 1/3 the size!), the EOS-M seems more like it comes from the D300/D90 generation (not so impressive). Compared to the modern Nikons, the chroma noise and dynanic range generally seem substantially worse at even moderate ISO. Early days yet. Canon has the same preset system as the Nikon Picture Controls, and I'm working though them to to try and find something I'm comfortable with. (The defaults are generally over-saturated and over-sharpened.) The NR does work, but I'm concerned about just how much noise there is that needs to be cleaned up with this.

Makes you just wanna grab your D40 instead doesn't it?

I imagine it's blowing the minds of this Nikon 1 forum's members your giving us a complete rundown of the M but I enjoyed every bit of it. Thanks.

I wonder how many of your concerns have been addressed with the MII?

Me, I wouldn't want a camera without a viewfinder (even though I have a J1---my excuse there is I got it at such a killer price it was just a no-brainer, if for nothing else for the experimentation factor of trying out a 1 camera). I don't have touchscreen fever, but maybe after trying it I'd change my opinion.

My big decision today is choosing between my D5000 and my J1 for a hike I'm doing in a dimly lit forest (at 10,000 feet while visiting friends in the Colorado high country). Maybe I'll take both and compare.

Can you take same/same pics with both the M and V1 and give us your findings as far as dynamic range/blown highlights or not/etc?

toomanycanons said:

Makes you just wanna grab your D40 instead doesn't it?

Click to expand...

Yes, the thought had occurred to me. Though the problem there is the lens. No equivalent of the STM 22mm. No convenient, compact way to get 35mm FOV on a Nikon APSC...

toomanycanons said:

Can you take same/same pics with both the M and V1 and give us your findings as far as dynamic range/blown highlights or not/etc?

Click to expand...

Sure, I guess I can go try that. With apologies in advance as there is simply no way for me to be fair about it.

The most noticeable thing about the EOS M sensor is the hot pixels, which under the "NR OFF" setting really do seem to be "as is". So how bad its going to look depends completely on how high I dial the NR settings, or set the contrast, or which kind of scene I choose.

Meanwhile, here's one of the first shots I got from the M that I'm reasonably pleased with. I admit that I'm having trouble getting things the way I want, especially with outdoor photos like this one. Canon's image parameters seem much more comfortable with people than landscapes.

I did same/same with my J1 and my D5000 (also have a D5100 and a D5200). Jpeg to jpeg (SOOC) the D5000 won every time but it was pretty close. Of course, longtime DSLR owners can see the difference, it's just whether or not it bothers us.

I worked on a DxO preset to bring up the J1 raws (for some reason DxO likes the J1's raws more than LR5 does) to approximate the D5000's jpegs. And, like I say, it's pretty close except for a few critical areas. Indoors, well, I'm not even going to try to get my J1 to be an indoor camera although it's "not bad".

If I hadn't done same/same with the same scene, it'd be tough to know exactly where the J1 is lacking. Would my D5000 have not blown out those highlights, is the J1's detail not enough in this or that scene? Comparing tells all, but not many people would or care to.

Oh yeah, I'm just taking the J1 on my hike. Just gonna play tourist.

toomanycanons said:

Can you take same/same pics with both the M and V1 and give us your findings as far as dynamic range/blown highlights or not/etc?

Click to expand...

Alright, shall we see what happens then? Should be obvious to anyone which is which, as the EOS-M is 35mm and the V1 is 28mm eq.

First, two pairs of "bright sunny day" stuff,



one









and the other

Richard Murdey said:

toomanycanons said:

Can you take same/same pics with both the M and V1 and give us your findings as far as dynamic range/blown highlights or not/etc?

Click to expand...

Alright, shall we see what happens then? Should be obvious to anyone which is which, as the EOS-M is 35mm and the V1 is 28mm eq.

First, two pairs of "bright sunny day" stuff,

one





and the other

Click to expand...

Interesting comparison!

Of the first pair of images I prefer the Nikon, of the latter I prefer the Canon!

A D40, with the 40 micro, that would be pretty much like the M, wouldn't it?! Probably as cheap, too!

Or why not a D3000 with the same lens?! I didn't like the D3200, due to its 24MP sensor, but the size of the camera was not much bigger than my V2!

I use that lens on my V1, and V2, but it is swell on the D600, as well, in uncropped mode, if you convert the images to HD format, cutting away the corners (it vignettes badly at full aperture, otherwise)!



--
Tord_2 (at) photographer (dot) net
Mostly Nikon V1, V2, & D600, user

Tord S Eriksson said:

Of the first pair of images I prefer the Nikon, of the latter I prefer the Canon!

Click to expand...

The Nikon consistently leans to "hard" colors, the Canon to "soft". Of course there is some latitude in the adjustments, but as a general observation this seems to hold.

First and foremost, the the main problem with the M is it becomes literally unusable for things like that beach shot. I could not make out any image at all on the LCD, I was just pointing the camera in the right direction and hoping for the best. Even when I could see the LCD, it is far easier to compose on the V1's EVF when using the camera in sunlight.

Tord S Eriksson said:

A D40, with the 40 micro, that would be pretty much like the M, wouldn't it?! Probably as cheap, too!

Or why not a D3000 with the same lens?! I didn't like the D3200, due to its 24MP sensor, but the size of the camera was not much bigger than my V2!

Click to expand...

The Nikon 1 lens is 10mm, or 27mm eq.

The Canon EF-M 22mm, or 35 mm eq.

The DX micro-Nikkor is 40mm, or 60 mm eq. (on APSC)

By my way of thinking, you can use 35 and 28 interchangeably, the longer-than-standard 60mm is something else entirely. Hence my earlier comment re. the lack of a compact, convenient 28 or 35mm eq. on APC dSLR. The only real solution is the 18-55 kit zoom. (which isn't bad at all at around 24mm, so can serve as a decent 35mm eq.)

Alright, time for another set, something I like to call "indoor handheld, daylight ambient". Here I think you'll agree the EOS M pretty well trounces the V1, though taken on its own merits the V1 image is acceptable enough.

Where I see a big difference is in big fluffy clouds. A Nikon DSLR will get the detail (in a jpeg SOOC), the J1's shot has to be brought up from raw and it still doesn't have the same detail.

In a forest, with shadows and bright light, the J1's highlights will blow easily but you'd only know that if you were shooting side by side, which I have to stop doing!

The vaunted quick accurate focusing system of the Nikon 1? I get a lot of missed shots even though all green boxes light up and a focus acquired beep sounds. I don't know if it's user error or what but the J1 is making me think all shots are in focus. Back at my computer the truth comes out.

My current state of mind is: if I'm convincing myself that I need a "small" camera to carry around for snapshots...operative term here is "need"... I'd be looking at a Fuji XE-1 or maybe a Panasonic G6, among others. Much smaller than my DSLRs, yes bigger than the J1 but would probably be more DSLR-like. Only by shooting with those two, for example, would I find out where the improvements would come.

So many cameras. So little money.

toomanycanons said:

The vaunted quick accurate focusing system of the Nikon 1? I get a lot of missed shots even though all green boxes light up and a focus acquired beep sounds. I don't know if it's user error or what but the J1 is making me think all shots are in focus. Back at my computer the truth comes out.

Click to expand...

Can't say I've ever had that problem with my V1. Sometimes with so many focus points all over the screen it will lock onto a different place than I want it to, but what it locks on is in focus. The Nikon 1 progam line tends to run to fairly slow shutter speeds by default, though, so you do have to be a bit careful about holding the camera steady even with the VR enabled lenses.

Richard

thanks for posting this, I had an M + 22mm for a couple weeks before returning it, fine camera but the lens ecosytem is completely limited. I thought the touch-screen menu + quick access menu was very easy to use, overall operation is sluggish compared to the N1. Lowlight shooting, IQ and headroom in raw files is superior to the N1, but the N1 is superior in daylight shooting, speed and FPS. Neither one of them is a good all-around camera, but if I was forced to choose one I'd probably take the N1 since it has a wider lens selection.

Richard Murdey said:

toomanycanons said:

The vaunted quick accurate focusing system of the Nikon 1? I get a lot of missed shots even though all green boxes light up and a focus acquired beep sounds. I don't know if it's user error or what but the J1 is making me think all shots are in focus. Back at my computer the truth comes out.

Click to expand...

Can't say I've ever had that problem with my V1. Sometimes with so many focus points all over the screen it will lock onto a different place than I want it to, but what it locks on is in focus. The Nikon 1 progam line tends to run to fairly slow shutter speeds by default, though, so you do have to be a bit careful about holding the camera steady even with the VR enabled lenses.

Click to expand...

Agree fully about that! Most of the time I use A mode and manually set the ISO, while outdoors, and S when indoors, to keep the shutter speed up!

Have just ordered the Voigtlander 20 for my D600, but it will work on the V1/V2, too!

If it took Canon's old FD lenses! Would have solved the painfully slow AF performance as well....

I still own my M but you certainly have a lot more patience than I. I got a sweet deal on it but the reality was it didn't fit my run and gun style of photography.

Canon Canada also didn't help telling me that I needed a new sensor when in fact it only required a cleaning which they grudgingly performed after I told them they were nuts wanting more for a sensor repair then the entire kit was worth! In other words, don't damage your sensor.

The poor perfornance + poorly place (aka easy to bump) mode dial and dreadful customer service just turned me off the whole thing. And I should mention I've been a Canon shooter since 1968.

JanMatthys said:

Richard

thanks for posting this, I had an M + 22mm for a couple weeks before returning it, fine camera but the lens ecosytem is completely limited. I thought the touch-screen menu + quick access menu was very easy to use, overall operation is sluggish compared to the N1. Lowlight shooting, IQ and headroom in raw files is superior to the N1, but the N1 is superior in daylight shooting, speed and FPS. Neither one of them is a good all-around camera, but if I was forced to choose one I'd probably take the N1 since it has a wider lens selection.

Click to expand...

I went back and forth about getting an M at it's recent firesale prices. But I'd never have jumped on the M + 22mm package because I'm not a prime shooter.

I'd have kept it (if I'd bought it) if it's IQ and low light performance warranted it but if it's shooting performance was sluggish that would have been a deal killer. I need my cameras to react quickly. My J1, thank god, is a quick reacting camera. I'm willing to forgive what I'd call its shortcomings because of its speed of operation.

I'm not worried about the lens selection of either camera because I'm a Nikon DSLR guy at heart. Either one of these cameras would just be a snapshot sort of deal for me.