Saw a Canon EF-M today on Oxfam's online store - thought it would be a mirrorless camera, but it turned out to be a 35mm camera I'd never heard of before: it used EF lenses but was manual-focus only and had a split-prism focusing screen instead of the usual focus confirmation electronics. They very carefully DIDN'T call it an EOS because it didn't have the electronic focus aids or autofocus, and the name EOS refers to those features. It seems to have been aimed at the budget market (outside Japan only) and I really can't imagine it sold well. Having said that, it looks like Oxfam have already sold it, possibly because it had a 28-80mm lens. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-M_camera Anyone ever actually seen / used one of these?
Definitely an interesting find, first I heard of this, but I didn't really get into EOS until I bought my first dslr.
I had one a long time ago but I bought it as damaged and never got the shutter working so I didn't get to use it. They were sought after a few years ago because the focus screen was the right size to be re-fitted into some modern DSLRs to improve manual focusing ability.
Just spotted another one for sale on Oxfam's site - almost exactly a year after the last one. Too expensive in my opinion, £40 plus delivery, but someone might be interested I suppose. https://onlineshop.oxfam.org.uk/can...cannon-zoom-lens-35-80mm/product/HD_301861322 Their description of it, which I think came from a review, is interesting: Canon’s switch to the EF mount had let them neatly leapfrog their rivals like Nikon at the end of the 80’s. And during the 1990’s they would produce cameras that cornered both the high and lower end of the markets. The EF-M is not one of those. This probably is one of the most pointless SLR ever produced. Truth in advertising!
I didn't realise that Oxfam had an online shop but now I've looked through it I think they are unlikely to sell much photography stuff at the silly prices they are asking. I don't agree with the review of the camera, I think Canon realised that the autofocus during that time was not very clever and still wanted to cater for people that preferred manual focus. Even now a manual focus camera with a split screen can be more accurate than even the best of the autofocus sytems.
I'm not criticizing the camera, though I think an AF body that also had a split prism would have been better, I'm criticizing the review they chose to use, and wondering why they chose it - it doesn't seem to be a good one for actually selling the camera. I'm aware that there was a market for a manual focus EF-mount body - about 90% of what I use my Eos for is lens tests with non-EF lenses, and a split prism would be very useful. As it is I'm gradually moving over to using a mirrorless camera, which at least makes it easy to get a magnified view just before firing the shutter. Regarding pricing, it seems to be a bit of a lottery. There are occasionally good deals, but as you can probably guess they go fast - I think I buy from them about once every couple of months now, it used to be much more often. Their other second-hand items are usually priced more realistically, I think that the trouble is that most Oxfam shops don't have anyone who knows the photographic market, so when someone donates something they price it by looking at eBay and taking the highest price they find. And that has got very silly in the last couple of years.
