eos-m pics

17868128612_3b58aec45b_b.jpg



EOS M2
22/2

Jason
​
 
The Fuji X100S has arrived, and I must say it does not feel as substantial as the EOS M. The Fuji is larger all around, weighs more too, but does not feel as solid.

That being said, I cannot wait to get some shooting in with it...the battery is charging.


Both my EOS M and EOS M2 were used to take these pics...

🙄



18026332659_7ac548271f_b.jpg




17589923884_6f7ba6ac28_b.jpg




18186055056_4a69d1c9fd_b.jpg




Jason
​
 
back alley said:
i think you will like the fuji..be interested in hearing your comparison btwn it and the eos m…
the m would be perfect with a similar finder plus it's lens interchngability.
Click to expand...

The X100s and the EOS M2 are slightly different tools that go about doing the same thing in a slightly different manner, and the journey to the end result take different roads for each camera. That being said, I have a lot of click-time with my EOS M and I am quick with it. I am much slower with the X100s, but give me time and use.

End results from both cameras are very good, but there are differences and I give the edge to the X100s in both raw and jpegs files...however it's not a blowout X victory!



Fit and finish: edge EOS M2--it just feels better and more solid than the X.

Ergonomics: edge (FOR NOW) EOS M2--give me some time with the X, this can go either way.

Button and dial layout: edge EOS M2--the X's main dial is not only sunk into a cavity, it moves too freely. The M's dial is better. Buttons, I need more time with the X, but this is simply a memory thing.

Menu layout and access: EOS M--hands down. The X's menu is not the easiest to navigate and make changes.

AF speed and accuracy: EOS M2--the M is more accurate and consistent than the X (not that the X blows chunks, just the M is better here), and it's slightly faster as well...slightly.

Auto White Balance: X100s--easily. AWB with the X is both cooler than the M's amber tone, and far more accurate in all situations.

In camera jpeg settings and output: X100s--The X allows for a little more in camera jpeg tweaking than the M, and also produces slightly better files with more detail. The X's NR is cleaner with more detail, and the sharpening algorithm works a lot better than the M's as well.

On camera RAW processing: X100s--easily! The X's on camera RAW processor is great! It's like having DPP in-camera with all of the important changes that can be made. It's a good thing too, and a real bummer also, because Fuji's suplied raw converter (SilkyPix) does NOT offer the X100s film sims...NADA! You want Velvia after the fact with your Provia selection raw file, you need to convert that bad boy on camera only...

And lastly, overall IQ from raw file: X100s--the M2 does well all around, but the X pulls away here. The X file may be a hair softer than the M's, and have a little less saturation also, but the RAF raw files is brimming with fine detail! The RAF files are also silky smooth, and handle upper iso range with ease. Easily a stop better than the M, and almost the EQUAL to my Canon 6D!



In the end, I do not plan to abandon my M's, to relegate them to the "for sale" bin. Nor, do I find the X's pesky little quirks enough to scream LEMON, I WANT MY MONEY BACK!

Both the X and the M are capable tools, and perform exceptional well within their own realms of use.

Remember, the best camera in the world is the one you are holding in your hands...

Jason
 
Jason C said:
The X100s and the EOS M2 are slightly different tools that go about doing the same thing in a slightly different manner, and the journey to the end result take different roads for each camera. That being said, I have a lot of click-time with my EOS M and I am quick with it. I am much slower with the X100s, but give me time and use.

End results from both cameras are very good, but there are differences and I give the edge to the X100s in both raw and jpegs files...however it's not a blowout X victory!



Fit and finish: edge EOS M2--it just feels better and more solid than the X.

Ergonomics: edge (FOR NOW) EOS M2--give me some time with the X, this can go either way.

Button and dial layout: edge EOS M2--the X's main dial is not only sunk into a cavity, it moves too freely. The M's dial is better. Buttons, I need more time with the X, but this is simply a memory thing.

Menu layout and access: EOS M--hands down. The X's menu is not the easiest to navigate and make changes.

AF speed and accuracy: EOS M2--the M is more accurate and consistent than the X (not that the X blows chunks, just the M is better here), and it's slightly faster as well...slightly.

Auto White Balance: X100s--easily. AWB with the X is both cooler than the M's amber tone, and far more accurate in all situations.

In camera jpeg settings and output: X100s--The X allows for a little more in camera jpeg tweaking than the M, and also produces slightly better files with more detail. The X's NR is cleaner with more detail, and the sharpening algorithm works a lot better than the M's as well.

On camera RAW processing: X100s--easily! The X's on camera RAW processor is great! It's like having DPP in-camera with all of the important changes that can be made. It's a good thing too, and a real bummer also, because Fuji's suplied raw converter (SilkyPix) does NOT offer the X100s film sims...NADA! You want Velvia after the fact with your Provia selection raw file, you need to convert that bad boy on camera only...

And lastly, overall IQ from raw file: X100s--the M2 does well all around, but the X pulls away here. The X file may be a hair softer than the M's, and have a little less saturation also, but the RAF raw files is brimming with fine detail! The RAF files are also silky smooth, and handle upper iso range with ease. Easily a stop better than the M, and almost the EQUAL to my Canon 6D!



In the end, I do not plan to abandon my M's, to relegate them to the "for sale" bin. Nor, do I find the X's pesky little quirks enough to scream LEMON, I WANT MY MONEY BACK!

Both the X and the M are capable tools, and perform exceptional well within their own realms of use.

Remember, the best camera in the world is the one you are holding in your hands...

Jason
Click to expand...

great write up!
and i pretty much agree with it all.
i was so disappointed with the m's jpeg files after working with the x's jpegs...i'm using only raw for the eos now.
i agree about keeping the eos kit for myself also...usually, by now, with the urge to get another fuji lens or body i would have put the m on the block but i'm hoping to keep this little wonder. it just feels so solid and rugged.
 
back alley said:
great write up!
and i pretty much agree with it all.
i was so disappointed with the m's jpeg files after working with the x's jpegs...i'm using only raw for the eos now.
i agree about keeping the eos kit for myself also...usually, by now, with the urge to get another fuji lens or body i would have put the m on the block but i'm hoping to keep this little wonder. it just feels so solid and rugged.
Click to expand...
Yes a very interesting comparison.
My EOS M has now been on ebay for 2 weeks and still not sold despite price reduction - I know that in some ways I'll miss it when it's gone and have still not decided on what the replacement might be (But it must have a VF! 🙂).
 
thanks for the write-up, jason. i have an xe2 that i've rarely used because my first impression was that the output was soft. based on your write-up, i'll definitely have to play with the raw files more and consider what's there. i do really like the fuji controls, although the eos m touchscreen has really spoiled me for AF point selection. sounds like i'm coming from a similar place, i shoot a 6d and eos m as well. i'm sure some of my issue is that that i'm simply more familiar with canon output and DPP than fuji and lightroom.
 
dfatty said:
thanks for the write-up, jason. i have an xe2 that i've rarely used because my first impression was that the output was soft. based on your write-up, i'll definitely have to play with the raw files more and consider what's there. i do really like the fuji controls, although the eos m touchscreen has really spoiled me for AF point selection. sounds like i'm coming from a similar place, i shoot a 6d and eos m as well. i'm sure some of my issue is that that i'm simply more familiar with canon output and DPP than fuji and lightroom.
Click to expand...
Sharpness is a personal taste thing in my own opinion, but I have had no problems sharpening RAF files using either LR or CS6. An the on-camera raw processing sharpening is darn good.

DPP is fine, DPP 4 is a little better, but LR is just a better option for me. DXO Pro Optics 10 is not too shabby (but no support for RAF files), and far better than DPP.

Otherwise, there are no "rights" or "wrongs" here, just what works best for you...


Jason
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
Jupiter 8 m39 Rangefinder lens off horizontal alignment (the only lens)
Replies
4
Views
345
former member
F
Dante_Stella
For your amusement - prediction for the Fuji X Half 2
Replies
9
Views
844
Dante_Stella
Dante_Stella
CameraQuest
LOL Canon EF Sales crush mirrorless competition, No Kidding
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
3K
Dogman
Dogman
Valkir1987
Lucky SHD 50 Bulk film
Replies
8
Views
1K
HexagonKonica
HexagonKonica
j.scooter
Pics with Fujifilm GFX
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
13K
kxl
kxl
Back
Top Bottom