Canon EF-EOS M Mount Adapter Review
All of these images were taken with an EOS M series body and Canon EF or EF-S lenses using the Canon EF-EOS M Mount Adapter.
This Canon Mount Adapter enables any Canon EF or EF-S lens ever made to be used on an EOS M mirrorless body. Unlike some lens adapters that only provide a physical connection, this one provides all the electrical connections as well.
Everything works seamlessly - the metering, aperture control, autofocus and image stabilisation (IS) if the lens has IS. It gives the EOS M system a lot of flexibility owing to the vast range of EF and EF-S lenses that are available.
Included with the mount adapter is a small detachable foot with a tripod socket. Apart from a few very small and light lenses I wouldn't want to use the tripod socket on the EOS M body with an EF or EF-S lens attached for fear of breaking the lens mount. The detachable foot with tripod socket is secured with a knurled thumbscrew and can be removed by hand without the need for any tools.
That's about it.
When mounted to the EOS M the mount adapter's little foot with the tripod socket sits very close to the body. If you mount an Arca Swiss style quick release plate to the tripod socket that protrudes from the rear of the tripod socket, you can't remove the mount adapter from the body without removing the tripod socket or plate first.
This is just a minor issue.
When I bought my original EOS M I bought the EF-EOS M Mount Adapter separately and it came with the little foot that has the tripod socket.
By the time Canon announced the EOS M5 there were still very few native EF-M lenses and I think that Canon saw this as a weakness of the system, or even possibly an embarrassment.
To allow purchasers of the EOS M5 to have access to the full range of EF and EF-S lenses, which is vast, Canon started to ship the EF-EOS M Mount Adapter in EOS M5 kits.
However, customers who purchased these kits noticed a small omission. No little tripod foot. The adapter was included in the kits for a single purpose, that is, to allow the use of a wide range of Canon lenses. It seems that the tripod foot wasn't considered necessary and it was excluded to save money.
Furthermore, it seems that the foot isn't available to buy separately. This has upset quite a few people. As I write, the only way to get an adapter with the tripod foot is to buy the adapter separately. This is an expensive accessory and if you already received an adapter in an EOS M5 kit you won't want to buy another adapter just to get the foot. It's little things like this that make consumers angry with Canon.
I suspect that in time there will be cheap knock-offs from China to fill this gap. Official lens tripod mounts from Canon are quite expensive and already there are cheap knock-offs available for EF lenses. This will probably also happen with EOS M/EF-M, but at the time of writing I am not aware of anything being available.
The tripod mount on the adapter sits very close to the camera body and can only be used with quite short lenses because long lenses will be too front-heavy if supported on a tripod.
Not having the little foot on the adapter isn't a huge issue, but it's something to be aware of.
I have come to the conclusion that I need two separate camera systems.
Firstly, I need a small, light system to carry around every day that will give me high quality images and will be able to handle most shooting conditions. That system is the EOS M body with its own native EF-M lenses.
Occasionally, I need a camera system for specialised or difficult shooting conditions where the EOS M isn't ideal or isn't up to the task. For example, the EOS M really doesn't lend itself well to being used with long EF lenses and it isn't great in conditions where AF is tricky. That system is a DSLR with EF/EF-S lenses.
I don't wish to carry a heavy SLR system around all the time, but it is acceptable to do so when required.
The EF-EOS M Mount Adapter allows the two systems to be combined, but I have already decided that most of the time they will be kept separate. Therefore, it doesn't serve much of a purpose. If I am going to carry heavy lenses around, I may as well carry a DSLR as well. It will only be a little heavier than the EOS M body and its performance and handling will be much better than the EOS M.
I have used the mount adapter, for example when I want to use a macro lens with the EOS M, but now I don't consider it as important as I did when I first got the EOS M.
Would I Buy One Now?
My first reaction is to say yes, definitely. One of the weaknesses of the EOS M system is a lack of native lenses and having such an adapter gives you access to the enormous selection of Canon EF and EF-S lenses.
However, having said that it is simply a mechanical/electrical mount with no optics. If you can find a cheaper version from another manufacturer, in theory there is no reason why it shouldn't be as good. It would be a different story if it contained optics, but it doesn't.
Because of my personal preference to stick with Canon-made equipment for my own system, then yes, I would buy another one now. However, there is no reason why a cheaper version from a third-party manufacturer shouldn't work just as well.
Other Review Pages You May Be Interested In
Thailand is an incredibly photogenic country, both for its landscapes and its people. Regardless of whether you enjoy large Asian cities, beaches and islands, or rice fields and mountains, Thailand has something for you and it is a dream destination for photographers.
One of the great things about visiting Thailand is that hotels are plentiful and a lot cheaper than in most other countries. Each link on the right will take you to the relevant page on the Agoda website where you can see photos, read reviews, and book on-line. I use Agoda to book all of my own hotels in Thailand and the Southeast Asia region. Agoda hotel rates are usually always the lowest and I have received good customer service, therefore I am happy to recommend the company to other people. Here is some analysis I did regarding booking hotels in Southeast Asia.
Booking.com used to be more expensive than Agoda, but when I have checked hotel prices recently I have found their rates to be quite competitive. Unlike Agoda, you don't need to pay at the time of booking with Booking.com - you can simply pay at the hotel when you check in. Also, Booking.com show you total prices whereas Agoda show you a price and then add on 17% for tax and service charge.
If you want to compare prices between different on-line travel agents (OTAs) for a specific hotel, you can use a company such as HotelsCombined.
Images of Thailand