Of the M3...

Perfect is the enemy is the enemy of the good... The M3, as imperfect as it was, is, served a valuable purpose during its tenure.

.

A gentle reminder that life is short, you don't need a perfect setup, and many products that are "lacking", serve important purposes. Many times in my life, imperfect products, solutions, interim approaches "bridge" very important gaps.

.

Westgate Mall, San Jose, CA. Captured with a "Japanese" M3 imported via Tenso prior to the M3 being released in the USA. Note the timestamp.

Castello Di Amorosa, Calistoga, CA. Took a direct hit from the wildfires last year destroying their wine tower when the fire hopped the freeway and overwhelmed fire response teams didn't have the manpower to protect St Helena/Calistoga. The rest of the Castle did survive. Napa will never quite the same between the fires and COVID

Childrens Discovery Museum, San Jose, CA

Our beloved Calico, is no longer with us. The M3 served well for memories sake

Oren's Hummus Shop, Palo Alto, CA. Beef Hummus

Our firstborn, how they grow up fast

Railroad Museum, Sacramento, CA

Seagull, Santa Cruz, CA

Absolutely right. A camera capable of excellent images in the right hands - not ideal for all shooting, for sure, but then no camera actually is.
I do read some posts on here and wonder if some people have completely lost sight of the whole point of photography. You don't have to have the best of everything to take the vast majority of photos.

Good shots! I remember the m3 giving me very pleasing JPEGs right out of camera without processing compared to my earlier 7D (1). The 22mm was a very enjoying lens to use! But after a couple of months, for some reason, my shots started to get not quite sharp. I’d make sure they’re in focus but just not sharp. And it wouldn’t acquire focus in lower light. Sold it and never got back to m.

Swerky wrote:

Good shots! I remember the m3 giving me very pleasing JPEGs right out of camera without processing compared to my earlier 7D (1). The 22mm was a very enjoying lens to use! But after a couple of months, for some reason, my shots started to get not quite sharp. I’d make sure they’re in focus but just not sharp. And it wouldn’t acquire focus in lower light. Sold it and never got back to m.

DLO makes a pretty big difference with the 22mm especially at f/2. If you’re a DPP4 user, it’s worth reprocessing the Raws, if you have them as Ms older than the m50 don’t support it in camera.

Also, I had a front element fall out of a EF-M 28mm once, canon took care of it, but that front element missing smudged all the shots. Happens, I didn’t realize I in fact lost the front element for a month till reviewing shots an called Canon... maybe something similar happened to your 22?

1gregory1 wrote:

Rock and Rollei wrote:

Absolutely right. A camera capable of excellent images in the right hands - not ideal for all shooting, for sure, but then no camera actually is.
I do read some posts on here and wonder if some people have completely lost sight of the whole point of photography. You don't have to have the best of everything to take the vast majority of photos.

looking at your gear list....haha

You don't want to take any notice of that, it's hopelessly incomplete.
As a pro, I have to shoot in incredibly poor light a lot of the time at conferences.
For fun, I shoot mostly Ms.

RLight wrote:

Swerky wrote:

Good shots! I remember the m3 giving me very pleasing JPEGs right out of camera without processing compared to my earlier 7D (1). The 22mm was a very enjoying lens to use! But after a couple of months, for some reason, my shots started to get not quite sharp. I’d make sure they’re in focus but just not sharp. And it wouldn’t acquire focus in lower light. Sold it and never got back to m.

DLO makes a pretty big difference with the 22mm especially at f/2. If you’re a DPP4 user, it’s worth reprocessing the Raws, if you have them as Ms older than the m50 don’t support it in camera.

Also, I had a front element fall out of a EF-M 28mm once, canon took care of it, but that front element missing smudged all the shots. Happens, I didn’t realize I in fact lost the front element for a month till reviewing shots an called Canon... maybe something similar happened to your 22?

I had to clarify that the problem was with the body not the lens. Because it was the same case with the ef-m 18-55. I did shoot raw as well and same case with processing. It was a matter that happened five years ago anyway. Long gone. Thanks for the tip though!

Swerky wrote:

RLight wrote:

Swerky wrote:

Good shots! I remember the m3 giving me very pleasing JPEGs right out of camera without processing compared to my earlier 7D (1). The 22mm was a very enjoying lens to use! But after a couple of months, for some reason, my shots started to get not quite sharp. I’d make sure they’re in focus but just not sharp. And it wouldn’t acquire focus in lower light. Sold it and never got back to m.

DLO makes a pretty big difference with the 22mm especially at f/2. If you’re a DPP4 user, it’s worth reprocessing the Raws, if you have them as Ms older than the m50 don’t support it in camera.

Also, I had a front element fall out of a EF-M 28mm once, canon took care of it, but that front element missing smudged all the shots. Happens, I didn’t realize I in fact lost the front element for a month till reviewing shots an called Canon... maybe something similar happened to your 22?

I had to clarify that the problem was with the body not the lens. Because it was the same case with the ef-m 18-55. I did shoot raw as well and same case with processing. It was a matter that happened five years ago anyway. Long gone. Thanks for the tip though!

The M3 was a dust magnet.

Im spoiled with an auto sensor cover on the R these days.

#metoo I still use it (I mean the M3 

***

ESO M3 + EF-M 11-22mm :  1/400s  f/5  ISO 100

Last summer

There is something totally unique about how the M3 sensor handles color, M6 and M50 are leaps above it in image quality but there is some magic in the M3 files that is simply missing in the others.

KEG wrote:

There is something totally unique about how the M3 sensor handles color, M6 and M50 are leaps above it in image quality but there is some magic in the M3 files that is simply missing in the others.

I feel the same way about magic and older canons... It’s the original M and M2 though that have that magic for me.

.

On a side related note, the R5/6 are a return to those days, but not quite. I hope Canon gives the M another go but with the newer CFA in it.

RLight wrote:

KEG wrote:

There is something totally unique about how the M3 sensor handles color, M6 and M50 are leaps above it in image quality but there is some magic in the M3 files that is simply missing in the others.

I feel the same way about magic and older canons... It’s the original M and M2 though that have that magic for me.

.

On a side related note, the R5/6 are a return to those days, but not quite. I hope Canon gives the M another go but with the newer CFA in it.

M3 is not my most used camera but I use it from time to time, here are few from 2019 and 2020

A camera taking nice images - and if not for fast action very good and some great 2nd hand prices to be had.

Really nice images.

Those you have taken at 1600 iso are impressively detailed and without much noise.

Is it raw  or jpg and have you done a lot of editing

Richard Daugaard wrote:

Really nice images.

Those you have taken at 1600 iso are impressively detailed and without much noise.

Is it raw or jpg and have you done a lot of editing

DPP4, RAW.

Default NR.

DPP4 has excellent noise handling, it's one of it's pros over Adobe products and others.

Nice pictures. I did about 40k frames before I upgraded to the M6.

When the M3 came out, I was a little peeved about the size compared with the M1 and M2. Then the M6 came out and it was a little bigger and M6ii and that was also a little bigger. Now, I would be happy if they go back to the M3 size.

trungtran wrote:

....

Now, I would be happy if they go back to the M3 size.

+1. I like the size (and weight) of the M3.

MyM6II wrote:

trungtran wrote:

....

Now, I would be happy if they go back to the M3 size.

+1. I like the size (and weight) of the M3.

There is no size difference between M3 and M6 mk I.

KEG wrote:

MyM6II wrote:

trungtran wrote:

....

Now, I would be happy if they go back to the M3 size.

+1. I like the size (and weight) of the M3.

There is no size difference between M3 and M6 mk I.

I have frankly never noticed those 2 mm, but M6ii is considerably bigger