Squeezing out a bit more from the old M5

deanmejos wrote:

Hey everyone,

long time lurker here, but it's also thanks to this forum that I bought a used M5 in 2020 and the amazing 32mm in 2021. It's obviously an old-ish M running on the Digic 7 processor and I was wondering if anyone can share their thoughts on getting just a tiny bit more AF performance from it.

My 32mm is the only lens I use with it despite having the 15-45mm and the EF adapter. I usually use the face tracking AF mode and let the camera take care of the rest but I was wondering if there would be an improvement if I used zone AF and tracked my subject in that mode in addition to moving the camera around rather than letting the camera track my subject's face all over the frame (like a kid moving around). In other words, will using zone AF while moving the camera around free up some processor power so the camera will have to perform less operations? Also, although I'm shooting in M, I leave it on auto ISO with +EC dialed in. Would manually setting the ISO also lessen the load on the processor to let it focus more on doing AF work?

I am not sure (I have no idea so I am not disagreeing with you) that the less-than-perfect AF on the M5 is due to a lack of processor power - it might be, but I suspect it is just an earlier iteration of mirrorless AF. The earlier versions (like M3) were significantly worse - when the M5 (and later M6) was launched many people raved about the improved AF.

I generally keep it simple with my M5 - single point AF (small box), no face tracking, usually Av, manual ISO, and only EC if required. It is generally not bad at all except for long lenses (EF 100-400L ii) and low light. I usually use it with 11-22mm or 18-150mm.

a bit off topic: but how's the sigma 16mm AF on the M5? I know it works well on the M50/II and M6II but how is it on an old body like the M5? I'm torn between getting a used 24-105L for my 6D2 but I really want the 1.4 even if it's on a crop. the going rate for a used 16/1.4 and 24-105L is about the same in my country so that's why I'm debating between the two.

I also have a 6D ii, and I have a EF 24-105L ii. The 24-105L is a very useful lens  on the 6D ii but it is a beast on the M5 - completely dwarfs it - the lens + adapter weighs a lot more than the body. The 180-150mm is a FAR better option for a walk-around lens on the M5 - obviously not quite the speed or IQ of the L lens, but a better match ergonomically.

A couple of things to check for if buying a used original EF 24-105L are;

• Is it a very early model - they were prone to ribbon failures.
• How is the zoom creep ? They were prone to getting pretty "loose" and the lens would drop to full extension if it was hanging while walking around.

I sold my original after buying the Mk ii a few years ago. The Mk ii has marginally better IQ, marginally faster AF, better IS, less prone to flare, a better hood, and a zoom creep locking switch, but it is also a bit larger & heavier, and certainly more costly.

sorry for the long post...but I'm really enjoying reading in this forum and I am learning a lot. thank you!