Would you buy EOS M/M2/M3 sized FF mirrorless cam?

I sold all my DSLR gear, everything, and bought an EOS M because I was fed up with the size and weight of my camera equipment.

When I would go abroad my entire hand luggage was camera equipment and by the time I reached my destination my shoulder muscles would be aching like a b#*tch. Likewise, after a whole day shooting my left bicep would also tell me to pack it in. For me my camera equipment became an inconvenience and a burden and I found myself just not bothering to take my camera anywhere anymore. That's when I decided to buy an EOS M with a 22mm prime, which is small/light with a decent sized sensor and have never looked back. A bit like an assassin going from a sniper rifle to a knife.

So to answer your question, I am happy with the image quality and the depth-of-field  APS-C sensors give, therefore if using an APS-C sized sensor instead of a 35mm sensor means smaller and lighter bodies and lenses, then I will obviously choose APS-C every single time without fail. However, when I think back to the 35mm film days, there were small compact camera's that used 35mm film perfectly well, so if a full-frame mirrorless camera meant something like an Olympus mju-ii just with a 35mm sensor instead of 35mm film, then sure. EF lenses however, nope, I'm glad to see the back of them.

crashpc wrote:

It seems we have two similar polls, where the other one has more discussion in it. I believe we should stay in the other one.

what other FF + MILC thread/poll ?

could pls. you post a direct link - as it doesn't seem to be as clearly marked in the subject line as yours - or perhaps was old and no longer on the I-st page?

jpr2

I would only buy something this small if it had IBIS and a nice set of lenses designed to take advantage of it.

The smaller size body would be an ideal but if it is also going to support the current EF lenses with or without and adaptor, then it needs a decent size body for good grip and balance (the M isn't that welding for either EF-S/EF lenses).  I suspect it will be some thing between the M5 body and the 5D/6D.  It would need to have EVF for a few reasons.  I am not sure it can start at $1200 though. I suspect it would be $2000+ rather.

crashpc wrote:

I thought you posted in there already...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4072349

thank you! No I didn't (reply there) as none of the options presented are even close to what would tempt me into FF:

• the RX1 and RX1r were close to be such a dream cam, thanks to their size and the sensor's IQ,

• BUT... the lack of a built-in EVF (preferably NOT akin to a fake pentaprism, but rather RF-like form-factored little brick, of the Nex-7 size, shape & functionality),
• and esp. neither RX1 nor RX1r being a true MILC had pushed me away

So, the closest to this poll options the "M5-like FF with EF mount and FAST" wins my vote.

However, a small RF-like brick shaped FF, with a built-in EVF, will be even better - much, much better actually

jpr2

Sure, who wouldn't want a full frame camera for $1200.  Wanting it does not mean it is realistic.

Option #2 basically describes an M5 with a full frame sensor.  The M5 is $950.  A full frame version will cost a LOT more.  If you want a very reasonable estimate, look at the price difference between and 80D and a 6D.  The bodies are very similar with the sensor size being the primary difference.  That would put a full frame M5 around $2000.