I've been shooting the Canon EOS M underwater for just over a year now. A few weeks ago, I was on a dive trip to Northern Vancouver Island, and ended up using all 3 lenses at my disposal, specifically the EF-S 60 mm macro (sometimes with the Nauticam SMC wet lens for the really small stuff), the kit lens (EF-M 18-55) with a +2 dry diopter, and the EF-M 11-22 wide-angle.
I posted the pics in the Western Canada Forum, and you can see them here: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/we...browning-pass-trip-aboard-nautilus-swell.html
Check it out if you want to see an example of what the various lenses can do with this camera!
Here are my impressions of the various lenses for this camera:
1) Canon EF-S 60 mm macro: This lens is actually an SLR lens, and is one of the most popular macro lenses for underwater. You have to purchase a $200 adaptor to fit it on the EOS M. The lens itself is great, nice and sharp, but the focus is somewhat slow when paired with the EOS M. I have gotten used to the slow focus, and doesn't really bother me when shooting slow moving subjects, but I know I am missing some action shots with it. I have also enjoyed adding the Nauticam SMC to it, but with the SMC flipped on, the working distance becomes really short, and focus even slower, making it quite difficult to use. But I do like some of the pics I have gotten with the SMC.
It would be nice if there was a macro lens native to the EOS M, as the native lenses are significantly less bulky.
2) Canon EF M 18-55 lens: as with many kit lenses, it is not really that great underwater because the minimum focusing distance is too long. It can shoot macro and wide angle, but neither very well. I don't use it that often, but when I do, I usually put a +2 diopter on it, which helps a bit. The only advantage to this lens is that it is versatile, if you want to shoot wide and (sort of) macro on the same dive. But for macro, the 60 mm is way better/sharper.
3) Canon EF M 11-22: I actually quite like this lens! It is actually a macro lens (that's what they wrote on the lens), and it shoots nice and wide quite well. The focus is very fast, and it's nice that it works in the semi-dome port meant for the kit lens. The lens is very compact. Since it can also focus quite close, I am enjoying using it for close-focus wide-angle.
Overall I am quite happy with the camera, but I feel a bit frustrated with Canon's apparent reluctance to support the mirrorless format. Canon chose not release the EOS M2 in North America, and Nauticam has discontinued the housing for the EOS M. I am very happy with the quality of the Nauticam housing. There are only 2 ports for it; a flat port for the 60 mm macro, and a semi-dome port for the kit lens. As far as I know, I am the only one using the EF-M 11-22 underwater, as I had to discover on my own that it seems to work just fine in the semi-dome port designed for the 18-55 kit lens (they are almost the same dimensions). When I asked specifically, Nauticam did not even know if the 11-22 would work in the port they made for the 18-55!
I really feel that the future of underwater photography is in mirrorless, as it seems to me that an LCD works better than an optical eyepiece for composing underwater, and the SLRs are really bulky (not to mention expensive) once you put a housing on them. Theoretically, Canon could put their dual-pixel CMOS auto-focus technology into a mirrorless and make more lenses for it, and then you would have the perfect camera for underwater: much more compact than SLR, but fast focus and equal or even better image quality than SLR. But it seems like Canon is afraid that this mirrorless thing may catch on, and is afraid that it will cause the SLR market (which Canon has cornered, along with Nikon) to shrink.
I really would like to stay loyal to Canon, as I do appreciate their ease of use, quality and intuitive menus. But if Canon doesn't get into mirrorless with more gusto soon, I may have to jump ship (gasp!) to Olympus or Sony, manufacturers that have embraced mirrorless wholeheartedly.
Thoughts and comments appreciated!
I posted the pics in the Western Canada Forum, and you can see them here: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/we...browning-pass-trip-aboard-nautilus-swell.html
Check it out if you want to see an example of what the various lenses can do with this camera!
Here are my impressions of the various lenses for this camera:
1) Canon EF-S 60 mm macro: This lens is actually an SLR lens, and is one of the most popular macro lenses for underwater. You have to purchase a $200 adaptor to fit it on the EOS M. The lens itself is great, nice and sharp, but the focus is somewhat slow when paired with the EOS M. I have gotten used to the slow focus, and doesn't really bother me when shooting slow moving subjects, but I know I am missing some action shots with it. I have also enjoyed adding the Nauticam SMC to it, but with the SMC flipped on, the working distance becomes really short, and focus even slower, making it quite difficult to use. But I do like some of the pics I have gotten with the SMC.
It would be nice if there was a macro lens native to the EOS M, as the native lenses are significantly less bulky.
2) Canon EF M 18-55 lens: as with many kit lenses, it is not really that great underwater because the minimum focusing distance is too long. It can shoot macro and wide angle, but neither very well. I don't use it that often, but when I do, I usually put a +2 diopter on it, which helps a bit. The only advantage to this lens is that it is versatile, if you want to shoot wide and (sort of) macro on the same dive. But for macro, the 60 mm is way better/sharper.
3) Canon EF M 11-22: I actually quite like this lens! It is actually a macro lens (that's what they wrote on the lens), and it shoots nice and wide quite well. The focus is very fast, and it's nice that it works in the semi-dome port meant for the kit lens. The lens is very compact. Since it can also focus quite close, I am enjoying using it for close-focus wide-angle.
Overall I am quite happy with the camera, but I feel a bit frustrated with Canon's apparent reluctance to support the mirrorless format. Canon chose not release the EOS M2 in North America, and Nauticam has discontinued the housing for the EOS M. I am very happy with the quality of the Nauticam housing. There are only 2 ports for it; a flat port for the 60 mm macro, and a semi-dome port for the kit lens. As far as I know, I am the only one using the EF-M 11-22 underwater, as I had to discover on my own that it seems to work just fine in the semi-dome port designed for the 18-55 kit lens (they are almost the same dimensions). When I asked specifically, Nauticam did not even know if the 11-22 would work in the port they made for the 18-55!
I really feel that the future of underwater photography is in mirrorless, as it seems to me that an LCD works better than an optical eyepiece for composing underwater, and the SLRs are really bulky (not to mention expensive) once you put a housing on them. Theoretically, Canon could put their dual-pixel CMOS auto-focus technology into a mirrorless and make more lenses for it, and then you would have the perfect camera for underwater: much more compact than SLR, but fast focus and equal or even better image quality than SLR. But it seems like Canon is afraid that this mirrorless thing may catch on, and is afraid that it will cause the SLR market (which Canon has cornered, along with Nikon) to shrink.
I really would like to stay loyal to Canon, as I do appreciate their ease of use, quality and intuitive menus. But if Canon doesn't get into mirrorless with more gusto soon, I may have to jump ship (gasp!) to Olympus or Sony, manufacturers that have embraced mirrorless wholeheartedly.
Thoughts and comments appreciated!
