Canon EOS M3 mirrorless camera with 15-45mm lens kit
Been looking to buy this for a while now - cheapest I've ever seen for this kit.
£309 (with £50 Canon Cashback)
Top comments
robertraekeenan
6 Dec 163#14
Granted this doesn't come close to my Canon 5diii however its still a great camera. It has limitations such as slow focus. But in good light it manages well. If you are into sport this camera isn't for you. 4k (who needs it) its a camera for taking photos. I use this camera a lot for weddings. Its not my main camera but as a third camera it pulls its weight.
Latest comments (44)
kashif18
24 Dec 16#43
Manged to buy an m5 for around £800 without the kit lens in ebay brand new boxed and with adapter.
StillTheFlyest to kashif18
24 Dec 16#44
But with the cost of the lens won't it cost the same as buying it whole and new?
luvadealme
17 Dec 16#42
which card is recommended?
also anyone got the ef-m 28mm macro?
ecnirp98
15 Dec 16#41
Thanks.
ecnirp98
14 Dec 16#38
Does anyone know if the M3 can take a 128GB memory card? there's not much price difference between the 64GB & 128GB cards, I'm guessing Class 10 90MB's is fast enough?
StillTheFlyest to ecnirp98
15 Dec 161#40
It can take 200gb in there, so 128 should be fine too.
WAWG
15 Dec 16#39
Now down to £419
WAWG
11 Dec 16#37
Amazon have put the price up again. It's now £439.
David_e
10 Dec 161#36
I bought the Mk 1 version from a HUKD listing a couple of years ago.
I so wanted to like it but painful focus speed and absence of view finder just didn't work for me. Amazingly, I sold it on ebay a couple of months ago and made a small profit!
Fakro1234
9 Dec 16#33
I bought the M10 on the previous deal for 199. However I now feel this is worth the extra 100.
I was originally just after a simple point and shoot which my friend had backpacking for about 100quid which produced amazing shots...
I want this for future backpacking trips instead of using my phone.
From a complete novice who wants this camera for about 2 years.
To take photos of landscapes, animals, everything I see. Which can fit into a small daypack, without the Extorinate cost.
Is this worth the extra 100quid more then I paid. As I'm not that impressed with the M10 to be honest. Feel as if my LG G4 camera is better
StillTheFlyest to Fakro1234
10 Dec 16#35
I had a look at this, the m3 is slightly better at low light iso but in the grand scheme of things, they are both pretty poor if you wanted something for that particular reason, apparently that is things like sport and wildlife. The quality is otherwise similar.
The rest is that the m3 has more pixels 24mpx instead of 18, more switches, buttons, and a mic input.
I went for the m3 because the m10 was sold out. I'm not particularly impressed either. Apparently they are not far behind the Sony a6000 which is supposed to be great.
WAWG
10 Dec 16#34
Amazon have now put the price up to £389
ecnirp98
9 Dec 16#32
Yep, I get what your saying, I said myself its probably a ploy so you rebuy all your lenses. I am not a camera person, just as a layman buying a camera as a replacement present it looks abit of a con and I'm sure manufacturers could do more to standardise lense sizes/mounts. Over time camera enthusiasts are going to build a collection of lenses, I always thought the idea of SLR's is that you can change lenses easily, so I presumed that was not based on manufacturer?
woldranger
9 Dec 16#31
That's an overly simplistic way of looking at things. Companies try to lock you in to their brand and who can blame them? Once you've bought a body and like it, you get a couple more lenses and then when it's time to buy a new body, the vast majority of people stick with the glass they've bought and get the same make of body. It would benefit the consumer is the mounts were all the same, but that would never happen. Usb isn't really a suitable comparison.
pwel
9 Dec 16#30
@ecnirp98 its a little more complicated, dslr and mirrorless systems use different optics designs...
mirrorless, despite the fact that they use the same size sensor as the dslrs, are a lot more compact....so this camera got the same reach as your wife's dslr with the original lens and dslr quality results in a lot smaller size...I don't think you can get better image quality for about £300 than this deal...
ecnirp98
9 Dec 16#29
Thanks for the info, this is a present for my wife, I know her Sony Alpha has the Lens it came with and she bought another, just a shame if she cannot use these with the Canon M3, you'd think all the camera companies would agree on a universal standard like they have for USB, but I guess they make money by everyone re-buying for their new camera.
luvadealme
9 Dec 16#28
any particular accessories folks are buying for theirs?
StillTheFlyest
8 Dec 16#27
Anyone have a good setup to getting pics off the camera on to a popular cloud like Dropbox/onedrive, without a pc or any copy and pasting?
Can't believe these cams don't have a auto backup/auto sync to cloud when connects to wifi function.
ecnirp98
7 Dec 16#25
Hi, I have a Sony Alpha DSLR, would the Lenses from this be compatible with the Canon M3? I thought the DSLR lens were meant to be interchangeable?
brilly to ecnirp98
8 Dec 16#26
the are interchangeable... within systems
you could use them on a new Amount DSLR or on sony mirrorless with adapter
may be adapters for other systems but i would doubt youd get any AF/electrical info etc
luvadealme
7 Dec 16#24
thanks, was enough to make me order. appears I have a similar set up to you. got a full frame 5d mk 1 with a few lenses, but over time realised I prefer a smaller unit with multiple lenses. my M does good pics, but find the auto focus too slow for everyday pics of my son. like the new M5, but too pricey at the moment.
Ajibee
6 Dec 16#23
Can usually be found on ebay, split from kits in the far east, for competitive prices - it's not like there's terribly much to go wrong from a warranty point of view. That's what I did.
StillTheFlyest
6 Dec 16#22
So does this have better picture quality over the M10 that's £109 cheaper or just some extra features?
kennethsross
6 Dec 16#21
Bought it as part of a kit with an EOS-M and 22mm fixed EF-M lens. Sold the body so lens and adaptor cost me £90.
I have no knowledge of the A6000, and haven't been following reviews, as I am happy with the M3 for what I want to use it for - almost entirely landscapes. I haven't ditched my dSLR - but when I'm hiking or visiting cities, I simply don't want to haul a heavy body and heavy glass around - and I don't want to be walking city streets at night with a very expensive full-frame kit over my shoulder.
woldranger
6 Dec 16#20
Specifically the M3. R.e. all CSC having poor focus, I'd already read about the great subject tracking on the A6000 and that's backed up in that comparison in Tomb's message. I know it's quite the step up in price, but I don't think I could handle ditching my DSLR for something that has huge limitations - I dont want a camera that can't do the majority of what I need, and with travelling I'm faced with all kinds of scenarios. So I guess it's a bit of a deal breaker for the M3.
Just out of interest, how much was the genuine Canon adaptor?
I've been looking at cameras similar to this for the last few weeks. Finally plumped for an Olympus E-M10 Mark II with the EZ lens to increase it pocketability .......(not sure that's even a word ???). Olympus currently has a £75 cashback deal on at the moment.
None of the other similar cameras can come near this Canon deal on price but good to know what else is available.
I've copied this excellent run down of the main contenders by EIGofre from a post in another thread, unfortunately he doesn't include the Canon EOS M3. Some of the prices have changed since he posted his advice.
(Warning: Long post incoming)
For a long term investment around the £500 mark (with an initial spend of up to £600), there are four mirrorless cameras I would be looking at:
*Fujifilm X-T10 with 16-50mm lens for £468 (£548 minus £80 cashback)
*Olympus OM-D E-M10 II with 14-42mm & 40-150mm lenses for £494 (£569 minus £75 cashback)
*Panasonic GX80 with 12-32mm lens for £449 (£549 minus £100 cashback)
*Sony A6000 with 16-50mm lens for £499 (no current cashback offer)
All four have their own advantages and disadvantages. Firstly to cover IQ and portability you've asked about specifically- The Fuji and Sony have an image quality edge, but all four are excellent and, as a new photographer, you will be a larger bottleneck on image quality than your camera will be! For portability, click here for a size comparison of all four models. They're all quite similar, with the Sony and Panasonic being a bit thicker with their protruding grip/viewfinder, with the Olympus and Fuji are taller with their viewfinder humps. They're also a very similar weight (san-lens), with the Sony, Fuji and Olympus all weighing between 380g and 391g, with the Panasonic only a bit heavier at 427g.
So with those two factors covered, as a long term purchase there are other things to consider;
*Lenses: Panasonic and Olympus both use the same lens mount and can freely use lenses made by each other, and third part lenses will obviously work for both cameras too. This means a lot of variety and generally quite affordable prices. Sony and Fuji use their own lens mounts, and the options available are less diverse and often a bit more expensive. The Olympus also gets a big value bump in that it comes with a telephoto lens at the same price that these other cameras only have the kit zoom lens.
*Autofocus and continuous shooting: All four cameras have excellent autofocus for static shots, to the point where it's not really an issue I would make a choice on. However when it comes to subject tracking, the A6000 remains uncontested as the best mirrorless camera at this price point for focussing on moving subjects (it also does it with a continuous shooting rate of up to 11fps, the fastest of all four cameras). The Panasonic takes second place, while the Fuji and Olympus struggle in this regard (all three of these cameras shoot at between 6fps and 8fps in continuous mode, which is very respectful but nothing close to the Sony)
*Image stabilisation: Both the Panasonic and Olympus cameras have image stabilisation within the camera body, essentially turning any lens into an image stabilised one and making it easier to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds. It also means lenses can be smaller and lighter when IS doesn't need to be built in. The Sony and Fuji do not have this feature in-body and it must instead be built into the lenses.
*Video quality: The Sony produces the best 1080p video of the bunch, while the Panasonic also has great video quality, can shoot all the way up to 4K, and the in-body image stabilisation means you can get smoother video regardless of the lens you use. Neither the Fuji or Olympus are really worth considering if video is a big priority, on account of poor subject tracking and a lack of video-oriented features.
*Viewfinder: All four cameras feature an electronic viewfinder of a good quality. All are perfectly usable, but in order of quality they go Fuji>Olympus>Panasonic/Sony.
*Styling and ergonomics: Obviously there's a lot of personal preference here, there's the more conservative design and rangefinder-style Sony and Panasonic versus the retro inspired SLR-style Fuji and Olympus. Two big considerations here though are the viewfinder placement and grip- the viewfinder of the Panasonic and Sony are placed near the left hand side of the camera, which is fine for most people but can make it awkward for people with a dominant left eye as you have to hold the camera across your face, while the centred viewfinders of the Olympus and Fuji are better in this regard. The grip also plays a big part for some people, with the small "finger holds" of the Fuji, Panasonic and Olympus being less suited to people with larger hands than the more robust grip of the A6000.
*JPEG image quality: This is not something normally mentioned in comparing high end cameras, as one of the big draws of these cameras is the editing and tweaking they allow you to do with images by shooting RAW mode. However Fuji have found a niche for themselves with their excellent JPEG presets and film simulations, and it deserves a mention here.
So yeah, ramble over. In short, all four are excellent and whatever you buy you will most likely enjoy and be very happy with the results of. However there are a few significant factors that will make some cameras better suited to some people but not others. Want an affordable camera and lens options from day one? The Olympus is a great shout. Want something you can take to sporting events or just for kids running around the garden? The A6000 will keep up with them. Want something stylish and will produce great photos out of the camera without worrying about editing? The Fuji is awesome for that. Want to dabble in videography? The GX80 has you covered the best.
EIGofre
woldranger
6 Dec 16#17
I was intrigued by this, mainly for the price but I'm put off by the negative feedback regarding the autofocus. I'm currently using a 550d with a Tamrom 17-50 2.8 VC and its a really solid package for travelling but I really like the idea of a smaller unit with a pancake lens that I can just slip into my pocket, but then be able to switch between different lenses for different scenarios.
Just out of interest, how well do these M mount units work with the EF-S lenses through an adaptor? I've got the Tamron, a Sigma 70-200 2.8 and aCanon 55-250 IS that I bought to take travelling cos the Sigma is far too big to take away.
kennethsross to woldranger
6 Dec 161#18
First comment - is the negative feedback on focussing referring to the EOS M or the M3? The M when it came out had pretty so-so focussing, but a firmware upgrade improved things significantly. I have no complaints whatsoever about the focussing on the M3. Few mirror-less CSC focus as well as a dSLR, and if you wanted to use one for sports, or kids running around, then I'd say a CSC is not for you.
The 22mm pancake lens is very sharp, but the combined depth of lens and body still make this a bit deep to be truly pocketable, IMHO.
Regarding the lens mount adaptor, I bought a Meike which was 'pants'. I then got a genuine Canon, and you don't know it's there. I use this when shooting with my 55-250 (which incidentally has amazing boke - almost as good as my 135mm F2.0L)
luvadealme
6 Dec 161#11
anyone updated from the original M to this?
pwel to luvadealme
6 Dec 16#12
hmm...tough decision
great price,better sensor/focus, flip screen, other minor improvements vs still no evf, no magic lantern on m3, tough competition...personally, although very tempted, I ll wait for the m5 price to drop
kennethsross to luvadealme
6 Dec 161#16
Yes, I have, and am very glad I did. Admittedly, I am a bit of a Canon fan-boy, but my EOS-M system sits between my larger full frame kit - which I rarely take on walkabout, and my S90 (which is never off my person).
I started out with the original EOS-M, adding a 22mm fixed lens and the superb 11-22mm wide-angle zoom to the original 18-55mm kit lens. Also a 55-250 EF-S used with the Canon mount adaptor.
I upgraded this kit in the spring of this year by replacing the M with an M-3, and I am very happy with the upgrade. In a small Canon kitbag, or a backpack, the system weighs little, but is versatile. Further more, it produces great images. I have the electronic viewfinder, but use it only rarely.
That thread is 18 months old. There have been a lot of positive developments in the EOS-M world since then.
robertraekeenan
6 Dec 163#14
Granted this doesn't come close to my Canon 5diii however its still a great camera. It has limitations such as slow focus. But in good light it manages well. If you are into sport this camera isn't for you. 4k (who needs it) its a camera for taking photos. I use this camera a lot for weddings. Its not my main camera but as a third camera it pulls its weight.
ecnirp98
6 Dec 16#13
Bought, Good deal, been looking for a new small DSLR with a view screen.
Also got a memory card:
SanDisk Ultra 64 GB SDXC Class 10 Memory Card up to 80 Mbps, Frustration Free Packaging
I'm guessing this will be fast enough?
tee_tee
6 Dec 16#10
Good deal at this price
robertraekeenan
6 Dec 16#6
This is a great camera. Not good in low light as it just hunts for focus. But I use this with an adapter and put some of my Canon L lenses on it and the quality of the image is brilliant.
If you are familiar with Canon DSLRs you will feel right at home with this camera.
toaster to robertraekeenan
6 Dec 161#8
This is not a 'great' camera, it's an average performing camera, but it's a very good buy for someone like yourself that has many Canon lens to utilise with the adapter. Compared to the competition it has slow focus, no 4k video or viewfinder, so-so kit lens and very limited native lens range.......saving grace is that it is quite cheap but down the line that could be a false economy.
pwel
6 Dec 161#7
@brandlew Unless you're on a very tight budget, the m3 is clearer better value/money
brandlew
6 Dec 16#5
I'm waiting on amazon to get stock in for the M10. Which would you go for? Is this worth £109 more. Thanks
andrewcelliott
6 Dec 16#4
Great camera and great price. I paid £250 just for the 15-45 lens!
zamribinrazali
6 Dec 16#2
how to claim 50 cashback ?
CheapLife to zamribinrazali
6 Dec 16#3
it's easy, fill out form and upload scan of receipt / invoice
Edged
6 Dec 161#1
Not sure about this Camera as I think the sony A6000 is a better camera but heat as it's a great price.
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
Been looking to buy this for a while now - cheapest I've ever seen for this kit.
£309 (with £50 Canon Cashback)
Top comments
Latest comments (44)
also anyone got the ef-m 28mm macro?
I so wanted to like it but painful focus speed and absence of view finder just didn't work for me. Amazingly, I sold it on ebay a couple of months ago and made a small profit!
I was originally just after a simple point and shoot which my friend had backpacking for about 100quid which produced amazing shots...
I want this for future backpacking trips instead of using my phone.
From a complete novice who wants this camera for about 2 years.
To take photos of landscapes, animals, everything I see. Which can fit into a small daypack, without the Extorinate cost.
Is this worth the extra 100quid more then I paid. As I'm not that impressed with the M10 to be honest. Feel as if my LG G4 camera is better
The rest is that the m3 has more pixels 24mpx instead of 18, more switches, buttons, and a mic input.
I went for the m3 because the m10 was sold out. I'm not particularly impressed either. Apparently they are not far behind the Sony a6000 which is supposed to be great.
mirrorless, despite the fact that they use the same size sensor as the dslrs, are a lot more compact....so this camera got the same reach as your wife's dslr with the original lens and dslr quality results in a lot smaller size...I don't think you can get better image quality for about £300 than this deal...
Can't believe these cams don't have a auto backup/auto sync to cloud when connects to wifi function.
you could use them on a new Amount DSLR or on sony mirrorless with adapter
may be adapters for other systems but i would doubt youd get any AF/electrical info etc
I have no knowledge of the A6000, and haven't been following reviews, as I am happy with the M3 for what I want to use it for - almost entirely landscapes. I haven't ditched my dSLR - but when I'm hiking or visiting cities, I simply don't want to haul a heavy body and heavy glass around - and I don't want to be walking city streets at night with a very expensive full-frame kit over my shoulder.
Just out of interest, how much was the genuine Canon adaptor?
I've been looking at cameras similar to this for the last few weeks. Finally plumped for an Olympus E-M10 Mark II with the EZ lens to increase it pocketability .......(not sure that's even a word ???). Olympus currently has a £75 cashback deal on at the moment.
None of the other similar cameras can come near this Canon deal on price but good to know what else is available.
I've copied this excellent run down of the main contenders by EIGofre from a post in another thread, unfortunately he doesn't include the Canon EOS M3. Some of the prices have changed since he posted his advice.
(Warning: Long post incoming)
For a long term investment around the £500 mark (with an initial spend of up to £600), there are four mirrorless cameras I would be looking at:
*Fujifilm X-T10 with 16-50mm lens for £468 (£548 minus £80 cashback)
*Olympus OM-D E-M10 II with 14-42mm & 40-150mm lenses for £494 (£569 minus £75 cashback)
*Panasonic GX80 with 12-32mm lens for £449 (£549 minus £100 cashback)
*Sony A6000 with 16-50mm lens for £499 (no current cashback offer)
All four have their own advantages and disadvantages. Firstly to cover IQ and portability you've asked about specifically- The Fuji and Sony have an image quality edge, but all four are excellent and, as a new photographer, you will be a larger bottleneck on image quality than your camera will be! For portability, click here for a size comparison of all four models. They're all quite similar, with the Sony and Panasonic being a bit thicker with their protruding grip/viewfinder, with the Olympus and Fuji are taller with their viewfinder humps. They're also a very similar weight (san-lens), with the Sony, Fuji and Olympus all weighing between 380g and 391g, with the Panasonic only a bit heavier at 427g.
So with those two factors covered, as a long term purchase there are other things to consider;
*Lenses: Panasonic and Olympus both use the same lens mount and can freely use lenses made by each other, and third part lenses will obviously work for both cameras too. This means a lot of variety and generally quite affordable prices. Sony and Fuji use their own lens mounts, and the options available are less diverse and often a bit more expensive. The Olympus also gets a big value bump in that it comes with a telephoto lens at the same price that these other cameras only have the kit zoom lens.
*Autofocus and continuous shooting: All four cameras have excellent autofocus for static shots, to the point where it's not really an issue I would make a choice on. However when it comes to subject tracking, the A6000 remains uncontested as the best mirrorless camera at this price point for focussing on moving subjects (it also does it with a continuous shooting rate of up to 11fps, the fastest of all four cameras). The Panasonic takes second place, while the Fuji and Olympus struggle in this regard (all three of these cameras shoot at between 6fps and 8fps in continuous mode, which is very respectful but nothing close to the Sony)
*Image stabilisation: Both the Panasonic and Olympus cameras have image stabilisation within the camera body, essentially turning any lens into an image stabilised one and making it easier to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds. It also means lenses can be smaller and lighter when IS doesn't need to be built in. The Sony and Fuji do not have this feature in-body and it must instead be built into the lenses.
*Video quality: The Sony produces the best 1080p video of the bunch, while the Panasonic also has great video quality, can shoot all the way up to 4K, and the in-body image stabilisation means you can get smoother video regardless of the lens you use. Neither the Fuji or Olympus are really worth considering if video is a big priority, on account of poor subject tracking and a lack of video-oriented features.
*Viewfinder: All four cameras feature an electronic viewfinder of a good quality. All are perfectly usable, but in order of quality they go Fuji>Olympus>Panasonic/Sony.
*Styling and ergonomics: Obviously there's a lot of personal preference here, there's the more conservative design and rangefinder-style Sony and Panasonic versus the retro inspired SLR-style Fuji and Olympus. Two big considerations here though are the viewfinder placement and grip- the viewfinder of the Panasonic and Sony are placed near the left hand side of the camera, which is fine for most people but can make it awkward for people with a dominant left eye as you have to hold the camera across your face, while the centred viewfinders of the Olympus and Fuji are better in this regard. The grip also plays a big part for some people, with the small "finger holds" of the Fuji, Panasonic and Olympus being less suited to people with larger hands than the more robust grip of the A6000.
*JPEG image quality: This is not something normally mentioned in comparing high end cameras, as one of the big draws of these cameras is the editing and tweaking they allow you to do with images by shooting RAW mode. However Fuji have found a niche for themselves with their excellent JPEG presets and film simulations, and it deserves a mention here.
So yeah, ramble over. In short, all four are excellent and whatever you buy you will most likely enjoy and be very happy with the results of. However there are a few significant factors that will make some cameras better suited to some people but not others. Want an affordable camera and lens options from day one? The Olympus is a great shout. Want something you can take to sporting events or just for kids running around the garden? The A6000 will keep up with them. Want something stylish and will produce great photos out of the camera without worrying about editing? The Fuji is awesome for that. Want to dabble in videography? The GX80 has you covered the best.
EIGofre
Just out of interest, how well do these M mount units work with the EF-S lenses through an adaptor? I've got the Tamron, a Sigma 70-200 2.8 and aCanon 55-250 IS that I bought to take travelling cos the Sigma is far too big to take away.
The 22mm pancake lens is very sharp, but the combined depth of lens and body still make this a bit deep to be truly pocketable, IMHO.
Regarding the lens mount adaptor, I bought a Meike which was 'pants'. I then got a genuine Canon, and you don't know it's there. I use this when shooting with my 55-250 (which incidentally has amazing boke - almost as good as my 135mm F2.0L)
great price,better sensor/focus, flip screen, other minor improvements vs still no evf, no magic lantern on m3, tough competition...personally, although very tempted, I ll wait for the m5 price to drop
I started out with the original EOS-M, adding a 22mm fixed lens and the superb 11-22mm wide-angle zoom to the original 18-55mm kit lens. Also a 55-250 EF-S used with the Canon mount adaptor.
I upgraded this kit in the spring of this year by replacing the M with an M-3, and I am very happy with the upgrade. In a small Canon kitbag, or a backpack, the system weighs little, but is versatile. Further more, it produces great images. I have the electronic viewfinder, but use it only rarely.
Interesting thread here which may be useful https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3866740#forum-post-56065987
Also got a memory card:
SanDisk Ultra 64 GB SDXC Class 10 Memory Card up to 80 Mbps, Frustration Free Packaging
I'm guessing this will be fast enough?
If you are familiar with Canon DSLRs you will feel right at home with this camera.