Anyone Moved from 70D to M Camera?

I have multiple DSLRs, including a 7D and a 5D MKIV. With the recent addition to our family, I found that the camera rarely came out of the bag. I bought an M6 MK2 and it is so much easier to grab and shoot one handed. I bought it with the EVF, and while that is really useful some times, most of the time it stays in the bag and I use the rear LCD.

I'm using both Canon T7i (800D) cameras and Canon M50 MKII cameras with the EF-M lenses. I do like the lighter weight. But it takes a while to get used to. It's almost too small, but I still like it...again it takes a while to get used to the feel. What makes it especially lightweight is when we use the EF-M lenses.

I found some things with the M50 MKII camera annoying. There's a sensor that switches the LCD screen off if you are too close to it. I couldn't find anything in the menu to shut that sensor off and no-one in the M Forum knew how to do that either (from one of the posts that I started). So, I found a workaround. I pull the LCD screen away from the body and then I can chimp all I want using the LCD screen without that sensor shutting it off. But I could chimp using the viewfinder exclusively (someone had mentioned that); I may try that method later.

The Q menu that we traditionally see on the Canon DSLR camera can only be seen when we push the INFO button four times. There's other ways to change the settings but I like the Q menu. I may try other things with it, because I think when we are used to doing something for a long time with a DSLR, we may struggle to do it another way. In the menu I was able to brighten the EVF to the maximum setting. That helped; otherwise using the EVF, it is darker and harder to see than the OVF (that we have with our DSLR cameras).

Another drawback to the M cameras is that there are not a lot of EF-M lenses available. I'm only using the EF-M 15-45 and 55-200mm lenses. Canon has not produced any EF-M lens with a focal length longer than 200mm, so if you want to use it to take pictures of birds with a telephoto lens (that exceeds 200mm) you must use an adapter and use either the EF-S or EF mount lenses. There may be a third party 300mm EF-M mount lens...not sure. I think the M50 MKII camera is too small for my Tamron 150-600mm lens (but I haven't tried it yet). I prefer using that telephoto lens with the larger Canon T7i (800D) camera (without any adapter).

Circling back to why I like the Canon M50 MKII cameras with the EF-M lenses. They are a blast to use. They are so small and lightweight that I bought another Canon M50 MKII. So I have two of them for each of the EF-M lenses. They are almost like feathers (OK, I'm exaggerating here.... ) that makes it all worthwhile to use them.

I hope that this helps and that I used the right terminology in describing my experience with a Canon DSLR (similar to your Canon 70D) and a Canon M50 MKII camera.

A little edit: I should add that for taking videos, it may be easier with the Canon M50 MKII camera when not using a tripod. The reason is that we can use the viewfinder to keep the camera more steady. When using the viewfinder it may be better for composition and in bright sunlight this is advantageous. For video using a DSLR camera we cannot use the viewfinder, only the LCD screen. I have not experimented enough yet with this, but the few videos that I took using the Canon M50 MKII camera with the viewfinder, they looked really great. I haven't got a video "stick" for them yet either...something I was thinking about doing...for both the DSLR and M cameras. With the Canon M50 MKII camera, to turn the video on and off, there's a button on the top on the right side. That button is hard to turn on and off, being that it's not tall enough...able to do that with my fingernail. I wish Canon made that a little easier...not sure why they made it that way...maybe so a person would not accidentally switch it to video.

I started shooting DSLRs in 2004, with the 300D, then moved to the 20D, 50D, 7D, and 7DII. I still have my 20D, but don't use it anymore. I got my first M in 2013, when the original M was on firesale. I used it as a complement to my 7D, and then 7DII. I would carry the M with me everywhere, usually with the wonderful little 22 F2 pancake attached, and got lots of great shots of people. It was also my travel camera, with a couple of extra lenses. I added the 11-22 when it came out, and the M immediately became my landscape camera too. The 11-22 is an amazing little lens. It's by far the best of Canon's three UWA crop zooms. I've also owned the other two (10-22, 10-18), and, for a while, shot the 10-18 on my 7DII alongside the 11-22 on my M. It was wasn't really until I got the M6, in a kit with 18-150 and EVF, that my M gear became my main shooting gear. At that point, I only used my 7DII for sports, and the occasional wildlife. Then, when I got the M6II in 2019, I realized it could do pretty much everything that my 7DII could do, and do most of it better. The AF on the M6II is excellent, and it will shoot up to 14fps. I have added more sharp EF-M primes over the years. I have the Canon 32 F1.4, and Sigma 56 and 16 F1.4. The M6II with 56 F1.4 is a great portrait combo. The M6II is quite customizable, and I have assigned my most used functions to various buttons. I mostly use the LCD for shooting with it, but I do attach the EVF when using longer lenses (it works very well with my 70-200 F2.8L IS II for sports). The touch and drag feature, which all Canon mirrorless cameras have had since the M5 (with the exception of the M6) is a wonderfully quick and easy way of moving the focus point when using the EVF. When I have the EVF attached, I don't use the auto-switching feature to activate the EVF (and turn off the LCD). I saw that another poster complained about that feature on the M50II. I don't know whether you can set the M50II to switch manually between screen and EVF. I would be surprised if you can't, but maybe it's one of the things that distinguishes the M6II from the M50II. I just use the button on the detachable EVF to switch between screen and EVF.

As you can see, my journey from DSLR to M (and now R as well) was gradual, and included a lot of overlap where I was shooting both. If you switch abruptly from DSLR to M exclusively, you will probably have a bit of a steeper learning curve. In my view, the advantages of the M system over DSLRs vastly outweigh any disadvantages (the main one of which is battery life, but that's not nearly as bad as the official stats suggest, because they test it using shooting conditions that almost no-one uses). Even though I now also have an R, and some excellent RF lenses, I still use my M6II a lot. It's so small and light, and gives such great results (the 32MP sensor, which is also in the 90D, is Canon's best crop sensor, and in my opinion the best crop sensor by anyone). The EF-M lenses, both Canon and Sigma, are truly excellent, and small and light. Coming from a DSLR, a couple of things you will notice, apart from the size and weight savings, are the vastly improved AF, even over the top-notch system in the 7DII. You get coverage over almost all the screen. That depends a little on which lens you use, but even the worst coverage is 80% X 80%, which is far better than the best DSLR coverage. And you get incredible accuracy, especially for portraits with eye AF.

Hello...

Rod Ortsac said:

I'm getting old and looking for a lighter gear. For those who changed gears from DSLR to M mirrorless, what should I expect and is it worth it?

Click to expand...

You are not old... I have the M series digitals - its' worth it. IMHO.

Rod Ortsac said:

I'm getting old and looking for a lighter gear. For those who changed gears from DSLR to M mirrorless, what should I expect and is it worth it?

Click to expand...

I had a 70D (with EF 24-105L and EF 100-400L) at the time I bought first a M3 which was a great price and bought as a backup camera (with EF-M 18-55mm) before a safari in South Africa.

I found the lack of EVF on the M3 very annoying - mostly because I need glasses to read smaller text or see details, but not for distance vision. With the 70D OVF I simply adjusted the diopter so that it was perfectly clear, and didn't need to wear glasses. With the M3 this was not possible. Using a LCD screen is very bright sunlight (I live in Australia, so generally sunny) can be quite challenging if there is no viewfinder. Also having limited dials meant using the LCD screen a lot more to change settings. I did like the form factor though - compact and lightweight was better for walking around town or taking out in the evenings.

A year later I bought a M5 + 18-150mm and this was a vast improvement over the M3 - much more capable, better AF, EVF, more dials etc.

I still defaulted to my 70D and generally only used the M5 when I wanted to travel lighter (like walks or hikes, or where space or weight was limited). Probably the biggest difference I found was the AF - the 70D could focus accurately in very poor light and the centre AF point was small enough to select a very small subject. The ergonomics with my 100-400L ii was FAR better using 70D than M5.

The small AF box on the M5 is not very small so not great for small subjects like birds or insects. The M5 (and M3 was worse) is not great at focusing in lower light especially with zooms (better with a 22mm f2, but still not as good as 70D with a 24-105L). Also, the mirrorless has (not sure about the M6 ii ?) a strange thing where it struggles to focus on (I think - I can never remember whether it is horizontal or vertical ? ) horizontal lines in low light, so you often need to rotate the camera slightly to lock focus and then re-frame. I just cannot get used to the ergonomics of handling the M5 + adapted 100-400L ii.

I now have a 6D ii to replace my 70D and it is still my default camera, but my M kit (M5, 22mm, 11-22mm & 18-150mm with 270 EX ii flash) is very handy for times when I don't want to lug around a backpack of gear. My entire M kit fits into a Think Tank Mirrorless Mover 25i which is smaller and similar weight to my small bag with 6D ii + 24-105L ii.

So, my advice is to think about what is important to you;

• EVF or not ?
• Use with larger / long lenses ?
• Number of dials/controls you want/need ?
• Adapted or native lenses ?
• Do you need a large flash or will a small one do ?
• Do you need to use a flash and an EVF at the same time (the non-EVF models obviously can take either a EVF or flash on the hotshoe, but not both) ?
• Do you need to use the infra-red focus aids of most flashes, or are you OK with pre-flashes of light (the M bodies cannot use the old "red lines" to focus with) ?

You don't mention which M body you are considering ? I have not used the M6 ii but from what I have read it does address a lot of the "deficiencies" of the earlier models like M5, BUT NOT the EVF.

Often older people require glasses of some form, which may pose some issues if there is no EVF (like I found).

Many of the more basic M bodies (including M50 and M50 ii) have quite limited options for changing settings (compared to a decent DSLR) and you have to do a lot of it on the screen, which may not suit ? Currently there is no current M body that offers good AF etc and multiple control dials AND an EVF (the M5 did when it was the flagship body, but it has not been replaced).

So to replace your 70D with a M body may require some compromises, and only you will know if they are compromises that you can live with or get past. I would strongly suggest going a store and trying your chosen M body, or even renting one if this is an option to try before you buy.

Personally I would struggle to sell my DSLR (6D ii) and exclusively use my M5, and buying the M6 ii would not work for me (no EVF). If I went full mirrorless it would have to be something like a R6 at least (and obviously because this is FF with larger lenses, it does not really meet your smaller/lighter criteria).

Colin

Rod Ortsac said:

I'm getting old and looking for a lighter gear. For those who changed gears from DSLR to M mirrorless, what should I expect and is it worth it?

Click to expand...

I've gone the other way.

If you have large hands there's no third party grip that will help you short of a cage.

I had the original M, the M2, M50 - all gone - and now the M100 is my snapshot camera, tethered with a wrist strap, the 22mm welded on. I almost bought an 11-22mm but I just picked up a 90D in September and I'm not planning to fill out two systems.

If there's nowhere you can go to try one out then make sure you can return the camera if it doesn't feel right. I was never comfortable with my M50. It's too small for me.

The M6 does have an optional, removeable, EVF. You can buy it by itself (expensive) or get it in a body kit. I have one. I love the fact that most of the time I can have a pocketable body (no EVF) but easily attach the EVF when needed. True, it blocks the hot shoe, but I can live with only using an external flash without the EVF. (Maybe the built-in flash can be an external flash controller, like with some of the xxD models - I haven't checked.)

I think it depends on what type of photography you do. Landscapes, pictures of family, walking round the city etc then yes it may be worth it. If you're using it for wildlife photography or with big heavy lenses then I would consider other option.

I do a lot of wildlife photography and switched from a 760d to an M6 ii and put it this way, I now also own a 90D. I use the M6 ii for landscapes with adapted EF-S lenses especially when hiking as it's light, but I can't get used to the ergonomics of it compared with the 760/90D. I mostly use mine without the EVF and I find it a bit awkward compared with a camera with built in EVF.

From the perspective of photography I can't fault it, aside from it having to go back to canon for dead pixels after less than a year. It's the ergonomics of it that I struggle with the most.

Jeff Peterman said:

The M6 does have an optional, removeable, EVF. You can buy it by itself (expensive) or get it in a body kit. I have one. I love the fact that most of the time I can have a pocketable body (no EVF) but easily attach the EVF when needed. True, it blocks the hot shoe, but I can live with only using an external flash without the EVF. (Maybe the built-in flash can be an external flash controller, like with some of the xxD models - I haven't checked.)

Click to expand...

Thanks Jeff

I am aware of that. I bought one of the original EVFs to use with the M3. It worked OK, but turned an otherwise fairly compact camera into a rather awkward shaped beast - the M5 was a far better shape/size than the M3 + EVF.

In my case I pretty much always needed the EVF unless I was to walk around around wearing (mostly reading) glasses the whole time, so having it "permanently" mounted just didn't work for me.

Of course, others, including the OP may well be different as this is a fairly personal thing. I do think that (based on many of the comments I have read) a M5 ii would sell like hot cakes though as it would make a "complete" APS-C mirrorless. I think that quite a decent number of RPs or Rs (and now R6 ? ) have been sold because people wanted some newer tech AND an EVF, so maybe that is exactly what Canon intended (to move people to the RF mount) ?

Colin

For me, small size was important, so the M6 MKII without EVF was better than an M50 MKII for that reason (plus for the extra controls). On the other hand, an updated M5 would be great - maybe they can skip to an M5 MKIII and add internal IS; I'd buy one of those!

Jeff Peterman said:

For me, small size was important, so the M6 MKII without EVF was better than an M50 MKII for that reason (plus for the extra controls). On the other hand, an updated M5 would be great - maybe they can skip to an M5 MKIII and add internal IS; I'd buy one of those!

Click to expand...

Perhaps that is called a R7 Different lens mount though.

To me it seems unlikely that there is going to be a proper successor to the M5, which is a shame because it was (IMO) much closer to being a DSLR replacement (from a usability point of view - controls, VF etc) than any other M body, but it was still compact, and could use the compact EF-M lenses.

The RP body isn't much bigger or heavier than a M5 (but doesn't have as many dials/controls), but the FF lenses it uses are a fair bit larger/heavier than the EF-M equivalents. So I would assume that any new APS-C RF body using native mount lenses will be considerably larger & heavier than any M series body + lens.

https://j.mp/3IPxziO

A quick comparison of a few common combos (M5 vs RP, and M6 ii is even more compact than M5). In all cases the difference is both size and weight is significant (mostly due to the FF lenses).

Colin

Digirame said:

I found some things with the M50 MKII camera annoying. There's a sensor that switches the LCD screen off if you are too close to it. I couldn't find anything in the menu to shut that sensor off and no-one in the M Forum knew how to do that either (from one of the posts that I started). So, I found a workaround. I pull the LCD screen away from the body and then I can chimp all I want using the LCD screen without that sensor shutting it off. But I could chimp using the viewfinder exclusively (someone had mentioned that); I may try that method later.

Click to expand...

I don't know if this could help you.

In my M50ii I have in the yellow tools menu under nr 3 the Display Settings. There you can choose Display Control and set it to Manual. Then you can choose the menu item Manual Display, and make your selection: Screen or Viewfinder. (Only the Screen or Only the viewfinder...)

Thank you for the reply. I tried that in the menu, but it only gives us the option to use the viewfinder or the LCD screen (if I remember correctly without looking at the camera again). I want to use both, but the sensor automatically shuts it off when I get too close to do my chimping. My workaround is to use the viewfinder with the LCD screen pulled out from the body, so I can then use the LCD screen at the same time.

What I found interesting with the LCD screen pulled out from the body at an angle, I can take pictures that way looking down (and not straight ahead) and keep the camera/lens steady with the other hand. It's an odd way to take pictures with the movable and tilting screen, but it works. I like new things and am challenged with trying new approaches.

Andy01 said:

Jeff Peterman said:

For me, small size was important, so the M6 MKII without EVF was better than an M50 MKII for that reason (plus for the extra controls). On the other hand, an updated M5 would be great - maybe they can skip to an M5 MKIII and add internal IS; I'd buy one of those!

Click to expand...

Perhaps that is called a R7 Different lens mount though.

To me it seems unlikely that there is going to be a proper successor to the M5, which is a shame because it was (IMO) much closer to being a DSLR replacement (from a usability point of view - controls, VF etc) than any other M body, but it was still compact, and could use the compact EF-M lenses.

The RP body isn't much bigger or heavier than a M5 (but doesn't have as many dials/controls), but the FF lenses it uses are a fair bit larger/heavier than the EF-M equivalents.

Click to expand...

In general, that's right, but there is one exception. The RF 50 F1.8 is smaller and lighter (and cheaper) than the EF-M 32 F1.4. The 32 is actually a better lens, but the RF 50 is pretty good for the money. The RF50 is not a lot bigger than the EF-M 22 pancake. There's also a new RF 16 F2.8, which doesn't have an equivalent in EF-M (the wide end of the 11-22 is closest). The RF 16 is exactly the same size as the RF 50 F1.8. It's a pretty cool lens, and only $299.

Andy01 said:

So I would assume that any new APS-C RF body using native mount lenses will be considerably larger & heavier than any M series body + lens.

https://j.mp/3IPxziO

A quick comparison of a few common combos (M5 vs RP, and M6 ii is even more compact than M5). In all cases the difference is both size and weight is significant (mostly due to the FF lenses).

Colin

Click to expand...

Rod Ortsac said:

I'm getting old and looking for a lighter gear. For those who changed gears from DSLR to M mirrorless, what should I expect and is it worth it?

Click to expand...

I moved the other way around: M5 to 70D. best move I've made in long while. replacing half baked toy with 20+ years of field use experience with design, UX and general ergonomics.

the only reason to buy M for me is 32/1.4 or optionally 22/2. bodies, in terms of ergonomics, are abnormal for me, after 15 years of using normal EOS (D)SLRs.

I'm not even gonna comment on bad EVFs or miserable battery life...

akustykmagmanetpl said:

Rod Ortsac said:

I'm getting old and looking for a lighter gear. For those who changed gears from DSLR to M mirrorless, what should I expect and is it worth it?

Click to expand...

I moved the other way around: M5 to 70D. best move I've made in long while. replacing half baked toy with 20+ years of field use experience with design, UX and general ergonomics.

the only reason to buy M for me is 32/1.4 or optionally 22/2. bodies, in terms of ergonomics, are abnormal for me, after 15 years of using normal EOS (D)SLRs.

I'm not even gonna comment on bad EVFs or miserable battery life...

Click to expand...

I really wanted to like the M. Earlier I sold a M50 but kept a M100. It's white with a silver 22mm, a tan leather foot, and a wrist strap. It's perfect for the street. Gentleman style.

So with that I bought a 90D, battery grip, and added the 18-135mm to the EF-S Trilogy.

It's for a new venture in video, but it's also nice to have the feel of a real DSLR in hand.

1.5 years ago I decided it was time to update my old T1i with a newer Canon and get back into more serious photography. I decided the 70D was feature-rich enough for my needs and was at a good price point for an upgrade without a big spend. I could continue to use my EF (ii) 50mm f1.8, EF-S 10-18mm IS STM, and EF-S 55-250 IS.

The 70D I got came with the versatile EF-S 18-135mm IS STM which I really like: sharp enough and a great, versatile walk-around lens.

I was doing some video with the 70D of my wife paddling dragon boats on the river, and not getting very good results --- it would keep focusing on other objects, was hard to hand-hold steady at telephoto, and you could not use video with the viewfinder. I chase the boats on bicycle down the river and a tripod was too slow and cumbersome an option, although I did try one for a while.

I was also doing astrophotography, and the 70D is a somewhat big, heavy body on a small telescope. I was also seeing a lot of noise in low-light photography and realized newer Canons did better with this, and had higher resolutions.

Two months later I decided to go to the 'M' system with a 24 megapixel (MP) M6 kit at a great price off ebay, which came with the EF - EOS M adapter so I could use all my existing lenses.

For me it was a dream come true.... the tiny, light body on telescope balanced well and had even better resolution and image quality than the 70D. I got nice, steady video with my eye to the electronic viewfinder (EVF), good low-light performance, and I love the small size, low weight, and nice ergonomics of the M6 body even though I'm over 6' tall and have large hands. I didn't miss the 70D and sold the body fairly quickly. I liked seeing the 'adjusted image' live in the EVF, it's large and bright and has plenty enough resolution. I don't miss optical viewfinders, and there's also no possibility of focus 'error' between the sensor and the EVF.

I got back into photography deeply, and started reading a lot more about equipment. I realized the 32 MP M6 Mark ii was even better for astrophotography and had many more features like intervalometer, 14 fps, 4k video.... and on Black Friday I found a deal I couldn't pass up, and upgraded to the M6ii. Absolutely love it and sold the M6 soon after that.

In the past year I've filled out my M system with a second body (24 MP M50ii which is also very capable), swapped out the EF-S 10-18mm lens for the amazing EF-M 11-22mm, the EF-S 18-135mm for the smaller, lighter, longer reach, and slightly sharper EF-M 18-150.

I also swapped out the older EF-S 55-250 (silver) IS (i) lens for the newest EF-S 55-250 (black) IS STM. I cut the rear mount of it to convert it for use on EF teleconverters, and found it a sharp, image-stablized lens even with teleconverters. I have a good Kenko 1.5x TC, and an MC7 2X TC that I often use with it. Even with the adapter and a teleconverter, I find the EF-S 55-250 is still light and well balanced on the M cameras, and I don't wish there was a longer dedicated 'M' lens than 200mm.

I've also picked up first rate prime lenses (EF-M 22mm f2, EF-M 32mm f1.4, Sigma 56mm f1.4, and Rokinon 135mm f2). All the primes are reasonably priced, and are very sharp wide-open even in the corners with the M6ii, far sharper than the EF 50mm f1.8 wide open. To get those quality of lenses in the EF mount or especially in the RF mount would cost a small fortune, I think.

So I'm a happy M system user and would highly recommend the system, especially if you are cost-conscious, want small and light equipment, yet also want top image quality.

I've found that DxO Photolab 5 software with its 'Deep Prime' de-noise gets me to ISO 6400 and even 12,800 and beyond in a pinch with clean, noise-free images using the M6ii, so at this point I feel no need to go full-frame...

Hello...

Rod Ortsac said:

I'm getting old and looking for a lighter gear. For those who changed gears from DSLR to M mirrorless, what should I expect and is it worth it?

Click to expand...

The M series is well worth it. IMHO.