i really like the kit lens 22 f/2 so far. I know about ML and I have used it before on the T3i. I have no problems with using the audio levels in Manual and the Auto is not too bad for that matter. But I normally use Manual mode and I even have to set the levels lower for an SM-58 direct into the camera. The lav I have is a little hotter, so I have to turn the level down even more a few tick marks. Here is a situation where I could use separate levels for audio inside the camera as opposed to how now only one level control sets both channels. And. this is all without any external pre amps which suits my less is best scenario with this camera. I am guessing they fixed up some issues with audio on this camera. I have an excellent sound system at home and I never hear any hissing or distortion just using the M internal audio.

No one on the M that has the newer version firmware can even load ML at this time. And I heard we cannot go backwards in firmware. If anyone out there has an M and the old firmware, we'd love to hear how it's going with ML if you are trying it out. No one has reported any disasters from it on the ML forum.

Alex

Regarding the audio, I recommend setting the M at one tick above minimum and using the preamp to manage levels, assuming the preamp has enough gain with your mic gain/sensitivity * source SPL situation. On juicedLink preamps, you can crank them to eleven without audible distortion, so if your preamp is good, don't be shy!

ML includes visual monitoring. I haven't loaded it on the M, so I don't know it's capabilities. On the 5D2, ML delivered visual and audio monitoring and allowed full control of the gain structure. It allows one to set the digital gain to 0 and muck with the analog gain independently for extremely low noise. (The Canon software sets the analog gain sky high, so turning the gain down manually isn't as quiet as with ML.) That said, I believe that the M uses a different audio chip than the 5D2 and I don't know if it's fully unlocked yet.

Most of our serious work is still on the 5D2, much of it in RAW mode now. I mainly got the M for traveling light and more for photos than for video, so I don't have any plans to try ML on it at this time. (I like ML for video but dislike using it for photos.) That said, I'm curious to read about others' ML experiences on the M.

Regarding photos, the 5D2 is definitely cleaner than the M and has much less chroma noise when pixel peeping. For web photos, however, the M is more than clean enough. And to have a 35mm equivalent with f/2 speed everywhere I go is seriously cool.

jon-

tomorrow eos-m movie mode test will be with the 22mm and the mix-pre.

i will use the mix-pre at proper level and the eos-m one tick above minimum. the pre-amps on the mix-pre are thought to be excellent so we shall see.

i also have this cheapo 3.5mm lav that does a decent job. i used it on a short interview with the younger daughter and she sounded good going directly into the eos-m. the only problem was i thought the level was a tab low even though according to the eos-m audio meters, i should have been dead on.

i did like the look of the footage.

i shot the two daughter interviews in portrait picture style
sharpness 0
contrast -3
saturation -2
color tone 0

okay, every new system is a learning process.

so live and learn.

ymmv.

be well.

rob
smalltalk productions
nyc

I have just decided to purchase this camera and am looking forward to incorporating into my wedding work as a fun tool. I can see it on a gorilla pod getting me some interesting angles and otherwise unachievable shots because of the size. I have not seen too much mention of image stabilization with the 22mm lens or any other lens with IS via the adapter. Any comments on that? I could also see how this would make a great steady cam camera/lens combo for certain shots as well.

The 22mm doesn't have image stabilization – I can tell you that much. I've seen talk on forums about auto-focus with other lenses, but no mentions of issues with image stabilization functions being impacted.

Yes, there are certainly audio limitations to this camera, and Canon seems to put in features that don't cannabalize their camcorder division. It's a shame that so many big corporations do this kind of horse trading on features. They ought to let stuff rise and fall on it's own merit. But not even the new 70D for almost $2k has the mic out jack on it. So the new M won't likely either. Can you say HDMI monitor?


i worked this afternoon on using the eos-m in movie mode.

the end result is decent.

Al says: Yes, I would agree, decent and more work than it should be.
i am disappointed in the audio controls.

the pre-amp and mic combo is typical consumer camcorder. nothing special on either count.

Al says: yes, but for the form factor, they get you started.

i ran a at875r short shotgun mic, mounted atop of the camera into a mix-pre and then sent the mic signal thru the mix-pre and into the eos-m's 3.5mm side port.

in the menu i had gone to the movie tool folder and switched the audio from automatic to manual.

i set levels on the mix-pre and attempted to calibrate the input record level on the eos-m. my mix-pre level even at it's lowest was going in mid-to high on the eos-m. i had to turn the eos-m record level to 1/4 as to not have the level peak into the red.

Al says: I look at that as a positive thing.


"...and the audio levels from the mix-pre were spot on." Al says: As they should be. That's what the mixpre-d is for. Making up for the lack of good pre and sound level controls in DSLRs.

i brought the sd card into my imac. the files are easy to ingest .mov/h264 files. the movies can be perfect b-roll for other canon dslr footage or even web distributed media.

i just wish the darn audio was managed better.



Al says: Yep, for the price it's a decent tool, but not a main one. Good enough for getting by, and especially if you are on a tripod, but not the replacement for a 5DMkiii for example. There are reasons you pay that price! (G).

I look at it as a great little B cam and travel camera, with the ability to stick a mic on it, while on the road, and hopefully get a good looking picture and sound. But I would never rely on it for the primary money making camera. I rely on dual cards slots so if a card fails I still have the job, real professional sound monitoring etc. But there are plenty of times this would do the job. It's very close to being just right. Next level up from this is likely a Panny Lumix or lower end Canon DSLR.

I'm curious what you guys think regarding how the EOS M with Magic Lantern running on it would compare to the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera? Obviously it doesn't have all the inputs/outputs of the Blackmagic, but in terms of image quality of the 'RAW' of the M vs. the Blackmagic 'RAW.'

It lent an extra appeal to the potential option of it for me considering it even if I never try to run it if they get a version that will install over the new firmware on the M. Less than third of the price of the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera – with a lens included!

I'm only guessing that the 16mm sized sensor would have a tough time competing with the APS-C sized sensor if they're both capturing RAW video, but I'm not thoroughly familiar with exactly what they both capture in 'RAW.'

I wanted the MBPCC, I still do, but you have to wait months now to get one. They still have not supplied the first orders and there are over 5300 people on the list just on the USA east coast. On the M, I wanted the headphone jack, flip out OLED and Raw recording amongst other things on that cam. I really miss the flip out LCD and no audio monitoring at all on the M. You have to pull the card to transfer files to see what you got or use an HDMI and ext monitor or the AV port for SD quality only. What a hassle. But, it was only $300. it has a large sensor and the ability to mount good glass.

Alex

"You have to pull the card to transfer files to see what you got or use an HDMI and ext monitor or the AV port for SD quality only. What a hassle. But, it was only $300. it has a large sensor and the ability to mount good glass."

I don't understand what you are saying: First, you can also attach the camera by usb cable to a computer to "see"/play/hear the files. Second, aside from wifi, what is different about the EOS-M for seeing/playing the files via HDMI, via cable, via usb, or pulling the card compared to other cameras?. What hassle am I getting that I don't get on other cameras? Or, are you just elaborately talking about inability to monitor the audio (other than the meters) in real time?

mostly the inability to monitor the auido before or after without having to buy more equipment to lug around or be near a computer or TV. I bought the camera for it's large sensor, able to attach good glass like a 50mm f.12 and its very small size that makes me look like justt another tourist anywhere in the world. I do not want to draw attention to me when I shoot somewhere. I need to get interviews quickly and get out sometimes. I mostly work on my doc projects lately. I do not usually have time for any elaborate setups. Usually a one man band. I need fast lenses to shoot in very low light. I know I need a 5DM3, but can't afford it now. So I chose to get this camera and buy good glass when I can afford it.

But the audio. Very risky to find out in post the battery in lav died and I never knew it and I cannot go back to get that interview or b roll again. I do not want to carry around a second sound system, more batteries and more chargers, etc. Less is best. Just wish I could monitor the audio before, during and right after just like I do withe the video clips. One stinking little 3.5 mm jack with three wires or direct on the PCB. Come on Canon. Geez

I am not alone. Many people hate that we don't have a headphone jack. Please tell me how the usb out to a computer works. Is there some special app needed? I plugged the usb cable that came with the M into my home computer that is Windows 7 and I cannot get it to do anything. How do you do it?

Alex

The M video quality won't compete with RAW. We've been shooting RAW with the 5D2 and ML, and the quality is truly amazing.

That said, RAW is not the right solution in all cases. We've spent a lot of time getting the workflow figured out. Basically, we will offload a card and pre-process/backup the video using custom scripts. When that is done, we will manually load some files into a program, set the temporary "look", and render proxies overnight. The next day we will edit with proxies and do the effects work on compressed DNGs.

This would be much faster (like faster than real-time) using Cineform RAW, but the quality isn't as high as with our approach. In our tests Cineform RAW is a bit noisy. Then again, its encoding speed is excellent.

So, why are we shooting RAW? Because we're shooting against a greenscreen and want excellent edges. We also want to match the colors to various 3rd party scenes. The quality we get from shooting RAW makes a huge difference for our final output. But for typical, fast-turnaround work, we still shoot h.264. It's faster, simpler, and takes less storage. Unless you're doing effects of some really demanding color correction, it's much easier to set the look in the camera, shoot h.264, and do the small amount of coloring needed to match shots.

mostly the inability to monitor the auido before or after without having to buy more equipment to lug around or be near a computer or TV. I bought the camera for it's large sensor, able to attach good glass like a 50mm f.12 and its very small size that makes me look like justt another tourist anywhere in the world. I do not want to draw attention to me when I shoot somewhere. I need to get interviews quickly and get out sometimes. I mostly work on my doc projects lately. I do not usually have time for any elaborate setups. Usually a one man band. I need fast lenses to shoot in very low light. I know I need a 5DM3, but can't afford it now. So I chose to get this camera and buy good glass when I can afford it.

But the audio. Very risky to find out in post the battery in lav died and I never knew it and I cannot go back to get that interview or b roll again. I do not want to carry around a second sound system, more batteries and more chargers, etc. Less is best. Just wish I could monitor the audio before, during and right after just like I do withe the video clips. One stinking little 3.5 mm jack with three wires or direct on the PCB. Come on Canon. Geez

I am not alone. Many people hate that we don't have a headphone jack. Please tell me how the usb out to a computer works. Is there some special app needed? I plugged the usb cable that came with the M into my home computer that is Windows 7 and I cannot get it to do anything. How do you do it?

Alex

Connecting the usb cable from the EOS-M to the computer provides two features: 1. It should enable you to see the video files on the sd card, just like a card reader. You can then play them, copy them, erase them. 2. You can use the EOS Utility with the camera connected by usb to change settings in the camera, including uploading custom or commercial or Canon Picture Styles to the camera, and to synch the camera clock with the computer clock.

Mark,

I do see the camera folder with the files when I plug in the USB cable, but, I tried a few different times to do something with it and it just goes into this Copying files routine that goes on forever and nothing ever happens for a long time as if it was hanging. I eventually have to use Task Mgr to close it and start over. So, I can't play files or copy them over. This is with a typical, working, USB 2.0 port on Windows 7. I have used EOS Utility and I have put a profile on my camera that way, but that does not help with me with the problem of never hearing any audio until I pull th card out and transfer files manually over USB 3.0 in a reader. I can easily play back clips on the camera for verification and hear a real tinny low level audio coming out of the camera speaker. Hah, speaker? It's a little whole on the case. Remember, buying more gear (ext HDMI DC monitor with a headphone jack or a laptop), then lugging more gear around as a one man band is not the workaround for me.

Maybe I should drill a hole, mount a 3.5mm jack and solder three wires into a circuit board. :-) Or, Intercept the audio signal before it goes out the HDMI port. Maybe someone can make an HDMI to headphone jack on a short cable and I could then hear the audio. But then the HDMI plug will automatically mute the camera LCD and audio. Maybe ML will be able to some magic.for us? :-)

Thanx for the reply. I would like to find out why I am not getting these USB results you mention.

Best regards,
Alex

Alex. I think the best you might want to go for is this.

Shure VP83F LensHopper Shotgun Microphone with Integrated VP83F

This solves a lot of your problems. And it records separately. None of these little attach mics are great but this one looks really interesting. And you can monitor off the mic/recorder.Set your levels prior to the recording, as usual, then monitor and record a separate channell. If I had to do what you are wanting to do, without buying a camera like the 5Dmkiii or the C100, then this is a good option.

mostly the inability to monitor the auido before or after without having to buy more equipment to lug around or be near a computer or TV. I bought the camera for it's large sensor, able to attach good glass like a 50mm f.12 and its very small size that makes me look like justt another tourist anywhere in the world. I do not want to draw attention to me when I shoot somewhere. I need to get interviews quickly and get out sometimes. I mostly work on my doc projects lately. I do not usually have time for any elaborate setups. Usually a one man band. I need fast lenses to shoot in very low light. I know I need a 5DM3, but can't afford it now. So I chose to get this camera and buy good glass when I can afford it.

But the audio. Very risky to find out in post the battery in lav died and I never knew it and I cannot go back to get that interview or b roll again. I do not want to carry around a second sound system, more batteries and more chargers, etc. Less is best. Just wish I could monitor the audio before, during and right after just like I do withe the video clips. One stinking little 3.5 mm jack with three wires or direct on the PCB. Come on Canon. Geez

I am not alone. Many people hate that we don't have a headphone jack. Please tell me how the usb out to a computer works. Is there some special app needed? I plugged the usb cable that came with the M into my home computer that is Windows 7 and I cannot get it to do anything. How do you do it?

Alex

Kit 18-55mm zoom:

Canon EOS-M Video: Palm Beach, Off-Season on Vimeo

Edited without re-compression, and downloadable. Used 'Standard' picture style, with contrast -1.

I will answer my own question regarding IS earlier. It is really really bad hand held. I have the 22mm and I do of course realize that there is no IS in the lens, but I am a pretty steady person and it is much worse than I thought it would be. On a bright sunny day or a well lit room on a tripod this cam produces ok results, but push it beyond that and quality degrades quickly. I was really looking forward to this cam for a 3rd angle as well as a small personal travel camera that shot stills and video but after 2 weeks of playing around I am returning it.

Alex. I think the best you might want to go for is this.

Shure VP83F LensHopper Shotgun Microphone with Integrated VP83F (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/966010-REG/shure_vp83f_condenser_shotgun_mic.html)

This solves a lot of your problems. And it records separately. None of these little attach mics are great but this one looks really interesting. And you can monitor off the mic/recorder.Set your levels prior to the recording, as usual, then monitor and record a separate channell. If I had to do what you are wanting to do, without buying a camera like the 5Dmkiii or the C100, then this is a good option.
Al,
this little Shure looks good. My first concern is dual AA batteries for only 10 hours. Rechargeable will help there.Thanks for the suggestion and a good one.
Alex

I will answer my own question regarding IS earlier. It is really really bad hand held. I have the 22mm and I do of course realize that there is no IS in the lens, but I am a pretty steady person and it is much worse than I thought it would be. On a bright sunny day or a well lit room on a tripod this cam produces ok results, but push it beyond that and quality degrades quickly. I was really looking forward to this cam for a 3rd angle as well as a small personal travel camera that shot stills and video but after 2 weeks of playing around I am returning it.

I don't get it - you blame the camera for your inability to hold steady a very sharp, non-IS lens? So get an IS lens.

I also have trouble holding the 22mm+M steady, but then I would have that trouble (and do) with any video camera with out stabilization for handheld video.

Al,
this little Shure looks good. My first concern is dual AA batteries for only 10 hours. Rechargeable will help there.Thanks for the suggestion and a good one.
Alex

Forget this kludge - use the best microphone for the job. You can very soon (even now) do exactly what you want with the EOS-M:

Magic Lantern is working right now on the EOS-M (but not quite ready with a simple install) and provides 1. audio monitoring through the digital port and 2. HDMI out viewing on an external monitor both *while shooting* video.

This is besides focus peaking, live histogram, audio meters visible while shooting, and the ability to increase the bitrate. There is even RAW video, and lots of other additions.

Mark - First of all I don't think the 22 is "very" sharp, or maybe it is the camera, or maybe it is the specific one I bought, who knows, but that is just part of the equation on why I am returning it. I did not buy the camera to add a bigger bulkier lens to it, I have my FS100 for that. For a 3rd camera angle for work it would not be hand held, but the other 1/2 of my intent was for personal, fun, travel, etc. where I would be shooting some kind of hand held video. I did not expect it to be perfect, knowing there was no IS in the camera or lens but man it is horrible! Reminds me of my early day flip cam.

Well Chad, for $300, I suppose you can expect the moon, but as mentioned by others, the IS is about the lens these days, and not usually about the camera. Certainly some cameras do have IS but usually more expensive models.(if you are talking about the feature set in this camera). When I hook up my IS based lenses, it works just fine. If you expect a non IS lens to help the camera get IS, that's not Canon's thing. They have been moving the IS into the lenses for some time now.

I don't agree that "pushing it beyond a bright sunlight day or a tripod" that the quality deteriorates quickly. Not sure what you are comparing it to. No worse than my 7D, which it is based upon.

Anyway, I only post this because someone down the road might read this and think we all are high on Canon box fumes. Chad, it would be great to have you post some videos to show us what you are actually seeing. I have no idea if you are experienced with hand holding video, I can only assume you are, and you know what they say about assumptions. . I for one try to avoid handholding video with all but wide angle lenses. But take a look at Mark's video, which has a lot of hand held shots in it. They are about what I would expect from someone who has done a lot of handheld work.

If in the mood, do some comparisons with whatever you replace it with, or are thinking of replacing it with. Maybe the grass *is* greener. Beyond that, best of luck on other $300 cameras you might want to use. I mean that sincerely. No slam intended.

I will answer my own question regarding IS earlier. It is really really bad hand held. I have the 22mm and I do of course realize that there is no IS in the lens, but I am a pretty steady person and it is much worse than I thought it would be. On a bright sunny day or a well lit room on a tripod this cam produces ok results, but push it beyond that and quality degrades quickly. I was really looking forward to this cam for a 3rd angle as well as a small personal travel camera that shot stills and video but after 2 weeks of playing around I am returning it.

Nice job Mark. It's as good as I'd expect it to be without some post work. Handheld was as steady as you likely will get. (opening shot I'm thinking of). Exposure was very good, looking at it in HD full 24" screen on Vimeo. The odd thing is, that Palm Beach is having as good of weather as Seattle! And those lawn geese have pretty long beaks. Anyway, thanks for taking the time to post.

Great to hear about ML, it will be a killer add on to this cheap camera. Puts some great functionality in the hands of folks without a lot of dough.

I don't think the Shure is a klug. It seems like it fits a specific niche quite nicely. Did I misread your post?

Kit 18-55mm zoom:

Canon EOS-M Video: Palm Beach, Off-Season on Vimeo (https://vimeo.com/71142643)

Edited without re-compression, and downloadable. Used 'Standard' picture style, with contrast -1.

Mark - First of all I don't think the 22 is "very" sharp, or maybe it is the camera, or maybe it is the specific one I bought, who knows, but that is just part of the equation on why I am returning it. I did not buy the camera to add a bigger bulkier lens to it, I have my FS100 for that. For a 3rd camera angle for work it would not be hand held, but the other 1/2 of my intent was for personal, fun, travel, etc. where I would be shooting some kind of hand held video. I did not expect it to be perfect, knowing there was no IS in the camera or lens but man it is horrible! Reminds me of my early day flip cam.

The "horrible" refers to *your* ability to hold the camera still? Right? Or what? There is no dispute among any professional viewers that the EOS-M's ability to shoot stills or video is any worse than any of the APS-C Canon cameras (quality of video, stills). It has the same sensor and focusing mechanism and processor (the latest). Comparing it a Flip is ridiculous, unless you mean only steadiness (which might be true for you, and me).

Whether you think a lens is sharp, given your limited use, is not good evidence. The professional reviewers show the lens rivals Canon's best. I am sorry you were disappointed, but that does not entitle you to make broad uninformed statements (or at least imprecise ones) without some blowback from informed users (at least informed about the camera). Should we quote you as thinking the EOS-M and all Canon APS-C cameras are no better for video than a Flip Cam? Surely you do not mean that? Or that you "think"' the 22mm is not sharp?

Again, I agree completely with you that it is nigh impossible to hold a very small camera with a tiny lens still enough handheld for good video *without IS*. And the EOS-M with the 22mm lens cannot be used effectively for that purpose (I had exactly the same reaction as you, disappointment). But that's it - with an IS lens (the small M zoom), which also gets great reviews for sharpness relative to any other kit lens, problem solved. If that is not small enough for you, fine, move on, but again to imply the FS100 with ANY lens is in the same size class as the EOS-M with its kit zoom is ridiculous. The 18-200mm e-mount lens alone for the FS100 (which I own (the lens)) is almost bigger than the EOS-M with IS kit zoom.

Nice job Mark. It's as good as I'd expect it to be without some post work. Handheld was as steady as you likely will get. (opening shot I'm thinking of). Exposure was very good, looking at it in HD full 24" screen on Vimeo. The odd thing is, that Palm Beach is having as good of weather as Seattle! And those lawn geese have pretty long beaks. Anyway, thanks for taking the time to post.

Great to hear about ML, it will be a killer add on to this cheap camera. Puts some great functionality in the hands of folks without a lot of dough.

I don't think the Shure is a klug. It seems like it fits a specific niche quite nicely. Did I misread your post?

Thanks, Al. On kludge: it was an absolutely brilliant suggestion you made given the OP's need; I was just saying that with the ML installed, it is not needed and one can use any mic. Using ML (there is no downside) seems to give the OP exactly what he wants without any compromising on mic quality or size or battery life.
And right, the opening shot is just trying to hold the camera still for ten seconds. I am working on other "kludges" to enable even more steadiness - the camera is too light!

Regarding the EF-M 22/2, it's quite sharp. I compared it to the 16-35/2.8L II with both lenses at f/2.8, indoors at ISO 400 and I could not tell the differences between the lenses. It's pretty amazing, given that the front element on the L is nearly the size of a tennis ball while the pancake lens glass is smaller than a dime. It's possible that I'd see a bigger difference at ISO 100, where the noise won't hide the last pixel of sharpness, but I'm not sure.

Whatever. Lens sharpness is a bit of a red herring. If the issue is stabilization, the camera, handheld, without an IS lens only gets so much blame. Yes, it has rolling shutter, so it has some jello. But if you're expecting a tripod look handheld, that won't happen. Even with a 5D2 on a monopod, I can't help but shake a bit.

The best solution when traveling light is to bring a bean bag or similar and to set the camera down. Want a moving shot? Try laying down some wax paper on a table. Put a towel down next and set the camera on it. Pull the towel for a poor-man's slider move. :)

That said, if it's not the right camera for your application, then it's not the right camera for your application. However, it doesn't seem the camera is doing anything poorly. You simply have a camera without an IS lens. It records the motion that is presented to it.

It's clear the EOS-M is well liked in WA!

I also like the suggestions (kludges) about dealing with non-IS (and IS) steadiness.

Mark - First of all I don't think the 22 is "very" sharp, or maybe it is the camera, or maybe it is the specific one I bought, who knows, but that is just part of the equation on why I am returning it. I did not buy the camera to add a bigger bulkier lens to it, I have my FS100 for that. For a 3rd camera angle for work it would not be hand held, but the other 1/2 of my intent was for personal, fun, travel, etc. where I would be shooting some kind of hand held video. I did not expect it to be perfect, knowing there was no IS in the camera or lens but man it is horrible! Reminds me of my early day flip cam.
Chad,
Check out the Olympus OM-D E-M5. Watch this Vimeo movie made with this camera.
Journey (Olympus OM-D E-M5)

Amazon has it at $900 body only-
Amazon.com: Olympus OM-D E-M5 16MP Live MOS Interchangeable Lens Camera with 3.0-Inch Tilting OLED Touchscreen and 12-50mm Lens (Silver): OLYMPUS: Camera & Photo (http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Interchangeable-3-0-Inch-Tilting-Touchscreen/dp/B0074WDFOK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1375751574&sr=8-1&keywords=olympus+om-d+e-m5)

I just got through with researching this one with great interest because they claim to be the fastest Auto Focus among all the cameras out there and they also are the only company to make this camera with a 5 point IS,, which looks superb IMO. He held the camera in his hand pointing out the back window of a moving tram through the city. They said he made the Journey movie all hand held looking out the back window of moving traffic. I was thinking maybe I could go without a tripod after seeing this footage.

Alex
Edit-I forgot it is also weather sealed. But I am still not clear about video specs. It shows it as-(Really? 59.94i? not 60p?)
Full HD: 1920(H)x1080(V), 59.94i Recording *3
20Mbps（Fine) *4 / 17Mbps（Normal) *4 : Aspect 16:9 (20Mbps is not that great IMO)
HD: 1280(H)x720(V), 59.94i Recording *3,
13Mbps（Fine) *4 / 10Mbps（Normal) *4 : Aspect 16:9



i ?? an 30p. And only 20Mb/s nitrate H.264, which is not that great.

Al - I think you hit the nail on the head with the $300 price point. Maybe I expected more, I certainly was excited about getting it and hoped for more. I had read so many good things but honestly was just really let down. One of my 2nd shooters uses a 7D with the 18-55 kit lens and the video generally looks pretty good, much much better than the M. Shooting well lit video on a tripod with the M looks okay and I would definitely say yes it is worth the $300 if that is the intended application. Shooting wide open anything above 800 iso introduces quite a bit of noise as well. Again for $300 I suppose that is okay but I wanted more and expected more after what I have read.

John - now that is quite a comparison and is more in tune with different reviews that I have read that got my hopes up. Maybe I have a bad copy but my 22 is not sharp at all, stills or videos. I have never shot video with any prior canon dslr before so if the IS is the same across the board without an IS lens then lesson learned on that front, I just did not expect it to be as bad is it is.

Mark - my flip cam comparison was to the IS only. There was never any comparison to the FS100, not sure how you got that.

Thanks Alex, I will check that out.

Chad,
I have felt the same as you about the M. Somewhat disappointed at times. I got minbe maybe two weeks ago. I think we all get our expectations high because we are thinking about how it has the same sensor as all the others except the full frame cameras. And, it has the Digic 5.

Alex

Mark - my flip cam comparison was to the IS only. There was never any comparison to the FS100, not sure how you got that.



So let me tell you: you said you did not want to put the kit zoom on the EOS-M because you already had the FS100 with a big lens, implying the EOS-M and kit would be just like your FS100 in size. And I replied that the EOS-M and the *IS* kit zoom is smaller than just the lens on the FS100. Got it? The EOS-M and kit zoom is small (and sharp) and you will be able to get steady video with it.

Look around all you want at big-sensor, small cameras. There is nothing better and smaller (not to mention cheaper) than the EOS-M + kit IS zoom.

John - now that is quite a comparison and is more in tune with different reviews that I have read that got my hopes up. Maybe I have a bad copy but my 22 is not sharp at all, stills or videos.

I wonder if you are having focus issues? If the AF is off, it will make the lens look quite soft.

I'll be curious to see the next version of the M. I would expect it to have the focus system of the 70D. And I expect that there will be a new M lens or two when it is launched. I have the Pro Fotodiox adapter and a nice, small collection of EF lenses, but it's really nice to travel with a smaller lens setup.

I'll take an f/2.8 10-16mm zoom and a fast 50 IS prime, please. :)

Jon,

How is that Fotodiox adapter working for you? I have now tried two of them and they both wiggle too much on the lens mount of the M. After it clicks on, you can go back and use your hand to rotate it easily and it moves/rotates back and forth a 1/6th or so. They assured me they sent me the second one that fit snug and tight, but it was the same problem.

Alex

If anything, mine felt a bit too snug when installing/removing it. I don't recall any excessive play. It's not with me at the moment though, so I can't reevaluate right now...

Al - I think you hit the nail on the head with the $300 price point. Maybe I expected more, I certainly was excited about getting it and hoped for more. I had read so many good things but honestly was just really let down. One of my 2nd shooters uses a 7D with the 18-55 kit lens and the video generally looks pretty good, much much better than the M. Shooting well lit video on a tripod with the M looks okay and I would definitely say yes it is worth the $300 if that is the intended application. Shooting wide open anything above 800 iso introduces quite a bit of noise as well. Again for $300 I suppose that is okay but I wanted more and expected more after what I have read.


Yes, I would agree. I gave up shooting video with my 7D because I felt that the image couldn't 'compete' with my 5D and 4:2:2 camcorders. I've not found that the M video seems worse than the 7D, about as bad over 800 as I would expect. I have shot a lot of higher ISO stuff with the 7D, some of it has come out quite well, but there are so many better choices these days, as you heard with the Olympus, and especially the GH2/3.

I think for the price it's a good trade off. It will be interesting to see what this fall's line up brings.

Hello everybody. Say, can you do manual adjustment to aperture, iso and shutter speed on this camera, or does magic lantern does it?

The EOS M out of the box provides full manual control in video (shutter, aperture, ISO all independently fixed at whatever you want), or shutter, aperture fixed, but ISO auto), or all three auto. Unlike many cameras, audio is also fully manually controllable.

ML mostly adds aids to shooting (like visible live histogram, focus peaking).

Just a FYI to newcomers, ML might have a solution for getting audio out of the USB port on the M. It's still work in progress. You also get RAW recording on the M now. And timelapse recording.

Alex

The EOS M out of the box provides full manual control in video (shutter, aperture, ISO all independently fixed at whatever you want), or shutter, aperture fixed, but ISO auto), or all three auto. Unlike many cameras, audio is also fully manually controllable.

ML mostly adds aids to shooting (like visible live histogram, focus peaking).


Mark, I must be loosing my marbles! When I put the camera in video mode, my ISO, shutter and aperture and all in AUTO! May I ask if there is a setting that I am overseeing?

I figured it out! On 'Q' press the camera icon for auto or manual option! So happy now. Thanks for believing in me guys!

Mark, I must be loosing my marbles! When I put the camera in video mode, my ISO, shutter and aperture and all in AUTO! May I ask if there is a setting that I am overseeing?

Yes, choosing "Manual" mode! It defaults out of the box to Auto mode. Touch the A in the upper left (if I recall) of the lcd. Then you will get the choice of Auto or Manual. Choose Manual, and from then on when you turn on the camera in video mode you will be in manual mode, with an M in the upper left.

Anyone using Wasabi batteries? It sure is tempting to buy handfuls of them.

Amazon.com: Wasabi Power Battery (2-Pack) and Charger for Canon LP-E12 and Canon EOS M, EOS Rebel SL1, EOS 100D: Camera & Photo (http://www.amazon.com/Wasabi-Power-Battery-2-Pack-Charger/dp/B009SS0FZK/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top)

Although there are certainly those who have had bad experiences with non-OEM batts, I've been very happy with Wasabi Power from Amazon.

I bought a couple 2-packs of LP-E6 equivalents (5D, 7D, 60D) and there is no discernable difference between them and the Canon version. This particular battery is chipped, and the body recognizes the chip just fine, all the batt management works, and capacity seems about the same in normal shooting.

I don't know anything about the Wasabi batts for the M, but these LP-E6 are great for the money.

Random question.
Can anyone tell me how to access all of the different video modes. I would like to be able to shoot 720 @ 60fps.
Right now I can only access 1920 @ 25fps or 24fps - 1280 @ 50fps - 640 @25fps

Random question.
Can anyone tell me how to access all of the different video modes. I would like to be able to shoot 720 @ 60fps.
Right now I can only access 1920 @ 25fps or 24fps - 1280 @ 50fps - 640 @25fps
You have the Video System set to PAL. Switch it to NTSC (second utility screen). (And of course '1280' is 720.)