# Future EOS-M Lenses



## Haydn1971 (Feb 17, 2013)

Ok, so I got myself a EOS-M "toy" yesterday, lets talk lenses - we have the following;
- 22mm - which is about a FFE of 35mm
- 18-55mm - which is about a FFE of 29-88mm

I'd like to see a few more, there has already been talk of a fast prime, a 55-300mm and a super tele, so what's coming and what would others like to see ?

Predicted;
- 55-300mm - I suspect this might be something less, perhaps a 55-200
- A fast prime ? Maybe something like a 85mm - which is about a FFE of 135mm
- Supertele ? Really ??? I just can't see this, maybe a 300mm ?

What would I like ?
- 15-85mm would be peachy

What about the rest of you ?


----------



## Menace (Feb 18, 2013)

I'd like a fast prime. Otherwise there is always the EOSM adaptor


----------



## Kathode-Ray (Feb 18, 2013)

I own the M as well, and got my EF-M adapter from China last week. It's not as sturdy as the original but it works very well and it's a lot cheaper...

I put the Sigma 30/1.4 on it and it's a very well handling combo. Focussing with the original 18-55 STM is noticeably quicker though. Seems the stepper motor is optimized for the AF method, the HSM and USM motors get there eventually but it takes a while. So I would love to see a EF-M 30mm STM to have a 50mm equivalent.

The M with EF 70-200 is simply hilarious but the pics are amazing!


----------



## DanielW (Feb 18, 2013)

Kathode-Ray said:


> The M with EF 70-200 is simply hilarious but the pics are amazing!



I wonder what is it like to handhold such a small camera at arm's length (no VF) with a somewhat heavy lens... Is it too hard to keep it steady?


----------



## Alex (Feb 18, 2013)

DanielW said:


> I wonder what is it like to handhold such a small camera at arm's length (no VF) with a somewhat heavy lens... Is it too hard to keep it steady?



Yes very hard to keep steady.. I tried my M on my 400mm 2.8 and then with a 2x convertor for a laugh.. It makes it almost impossible to hold..


----------



## Kathode-Ray (Feb 18, 2013)

You hold the lens, not the camera. The body just acts as a display with buttons that's attached to the back of the lens 

It takes some getting used to, you have to find a new way to hold it. With the 70-200, it's a bit strange but not impossible. I don't have anything longer than 200mm so can't comment on that 

The touch-shutter function is very handy when taking pictures this way.


----------



## botw (Feb 18, 2013)

I agree with Kathode. I was shooting with my 100macro last night. Hold the lens and use the touch shutter... It works very well.


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 18, 2013)

A Canon Tele-compressor? Like Meta-bones? 

If so, We'd have the ultimate selection of EF Lenses w/ extra speed.


----------



## elflord (Feb 18, 2013)

DanielW said:


> Kathode-Ray said:
> 
> 
> > The M with EF 70-200 is simply hilarious but the pics are amazing!
> ...



I hear this objection a lot and I don't really get it. You hold it much the same way you hold a DSLR -- cradle the lens in the left hand, and place the right hand on the camera body. There is nothing "unbalanced" about the combo, because the left hand is under the center of gravity (the lens) and the right hand steadies it. 

Generally you don't want to hold the combo "at arms length" (unnecesarily difficult), rather you'd hold it just below eye level a few inches in front. 

I've shot with a 135L on a small mirrorless camera and while it looked a bit odd (and manual focus made for an interesting challenge), it otherwise was quite usable. It's no more "unbalanced" than a large tele is on a DSLR.


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 19, 2013)

I'd like samyang to produce their 8mm fisheye in an EF-M mount


----------



## Menace (Feb 19, 2013)

When EOS M was first launched, the local Canon shop guys decided to attach it to a EF500 f4 - Looked funny but the images were stunning ;D


----------



## CanNotYet (Feb 19, 2013)

More pancake lenses!
UWA primes, like 10mm, 14mm, 18mm.
Something like the pancake zoom that MFT has.

And Tamron will probably come with a native 17-250mm EOS-M 3.5-5.6 VC...


----------



## infared (Feb 19, 2013)

CanNotYet said:


> More pancake lenses!
> UWA primes, like 10mm, 14mm, 18mm.
> Something like the pancake zoom that MFT has.
> 
> And Tamron will probably come with a native 17-250mm EOS-M 3.5-5.6 VC...



Better yet...just buy an Olympus OMD ...it actually focuses, has a viewfinder and lots of small fast primes AND zooms?
TODAY! 8)


----------



## CanNotYet (Feb 19, 2013)

infared said:


> Better yet...just buy an Olympus OMD ...it actually focuses, has a viewfinder and lots of small fast primes AND zooms?
> TODAY! 8)



Yes, but OM-D lacks a certain criteria essential to many of this forum...it is not a Canon... ;D
But I do agree. Although I would rather have the Panasonic GF form factor (as small as possible).
That is also why I would like more pancake lenses.


----------



## infared (Feb 19, 2013)

CanNotYet said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Better yet...just buy an Olympus OMD ...it actually focuses, has a viewfinder and lots of small fast primes AND zooms?
> ...



That is just it... I have a full Canon kit..(see my listed kit below)..love it for Full-Frame...but am sooo disappointed with the Canon mirrorless offering when it finally appeared. I was thinking that it would be so fantastic that I would sell off my MFT kit...but instead Canon made me cherish it more and pat myself on the back for buying into the best all-round micro "system". It could have been different...but it isn't. :'(


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 24, 2013)

CanNotYet said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Better yet...just buy an Olympus OMD ...it actually focuses, has a viewfinder and lots of small fast primes AND zooms?
> ...



Unfortunatly, no long glass is available yet for micro 4/3


----------



## Rocky (Feb 25, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> CanNotYet said:
> 
> 
> > infared said:
> ...


The main advantage of M 4/3 is the smaller size. Long lenses defeats this idea. You can always mount a long lens with an adapter.


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 26, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Unfortunatly, no long glass is available yet for micro 4/3



300mm F/2?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=333503&Q=&is=REG&A=details


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 26, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Unfortunatly, no long glass is available yet for micro 4/3
> ...



That's a 300mm lens? Do you work for Panasonic's marketing department? :


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 26, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



If you count the Crop factor, sure why not? afterall, 300mm FOV isn't that tele. ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 26, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> If you count the Crop factor, sure why not? afterall, 300mm FOV isn't that tele.



Ah...so crop factor applied to focal length, not just FoV? You must be in some weird, Star Trek-ian mirrored universe where the normal laws of optical physics don't apply. Say "Hi" to evil Mr. Spock while you're there...


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 26, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > If you count the Crop factor, sure why not? afterall, 300mm FOV isn't that tele.
> ...



Just imagine a world where 35mm didn't exist and only M4/3 did. Then we'd all be saying how 150mm is very tele and unless I'm mistaken, 150mm on m4/3 is pretty tele. 

Context is important, but since everyone shoots 35mm, I just put it in those terms. Eh Neuro?


----------



## rs (Feb 26, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Unfortunatly, no long glass is available yet for micro 4/3
> ...


Sorry to spoil the interesting argument going on here, but isn't that a 4/3rds lens, not a native micro 4/3rds lens?


----------



## CanNotYet (Feb 27, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Unfortunatly, no long glass is available yet for micro 4/3



Actually, this is not true. Both Olympus and Panasonic have telephoto zooms for MFT. 75-300 and 100-300 respectively. Granted, they are not very bright, nor L class optics, but they DO exist.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/919786-REG/olympus_v315040bu000_m_zuiko_digital_ed_75_300mm.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/736369-REG/Panasonic_H_FS100300_Lumix_G_Vario_100_300mm.html


----------



## Hillsilly (Feb 27, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Unfortunatly, no long glass is available yet for micro 4/3


99% (or more?) of long lens use is for sports or wildlife. Micro 4/3 isn't quite there yet. The AF systems, while improving, currently isn't suited to this. For example, its very, very difficult to get a good bird in fight shot. Most people who can get a decent shot are using old-school manual focus lenses with adapters. But, the next OM-D should move things up a notch. Panasonic are also promising something special. Following that, I'd be surprised if none of the m43 lens manufacturers (and there are 20 or so companies involved) didn't release a decent 200mm (AKA 400mm) or 300mm (AKA 600mm) lens. After all, the real interest in micro four thirds lenses is in fast primes.

Ignoring arguments about aperture equivalence and sensor noise, an M43 300mm/f4 is going to be a lot more affordable and easier to handhold and use than the Canon 600mm.


----------



## tonyDimov (Mar 15, 2013)

Can any one post some images so that we can have a look over it to choose anyone lenses,As I'm the new one to discover this hobby i would be needing some advice from the experts for sure.
___________________________________________________
Tony Dimov
consultant for posnation.com
8701 Red Oak Blvd, Suite 100
Charlotte, NC 28217
http://posnation.com/


----------



## ecka (Mar 15, 2013)

Hillsilly said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Unfortunatly, no long glass is available yet for micro 4/3
> ...



I think that cropping in photoshop is cheaper than buying a dedicate crop system just to have something smaller and easier to handhold. For example, cropping (or not) 6D+24-105L images vs. OMD+equivalent *lens set* (because it is lacking the *not-cropping* option) - which combo would cost and weight more?


----------



## traveller (Apr 14, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Funny how everyone is happy to convert the focal length to 35mm terms, but not the aperture... This would give you the equivalent of f/4 in 35mm terms. Useful, but doesn't sound as good as the "300mm f/2" you quoted in your original post. On top of that, as others have pointed out, the 150mm f/2 is "regular" 4/3rds and so on micro-4/3rds bodies, will focus even slower than the Canon M ;D 

As CanNotYet points out, there are two native micro 4/3rds lenses that get to 300mm available; not only are these slow, optically they aren't that great at the long end. 

None of the mirrorless systems yet have compelling long lens options, which means that they lose appeal as DSLR replacements (as opposed to supplements) unless you can live with lenses below ~200mm (in 35mm equivalence ).


----------



## bigal1000 (Apr 22, 2013)

Haydn1971 said:


> Ok, so I got myself a EOS-M "toy" yesterday, lets talk lenses - we have the following;
> - 22mm - which is about a FFE of 35mm
> - 18-55mm - which is about a FFE of 29-88mm
> 
> ...



+1 that


----------



## bigal1000 (Apr 22, 2013)

infared said:


> CanNotYet said:
> 
> 
> > More pancake lenses!
> ...



I'm thinking not all elevators go to the top floor!


----------



## Daniel Flather (Apr 23, 2013)

Haydn1971 said:


> What about the rest of you ?



A much lower price, or what we really want —a 24x36 with a pancake normal prime.


----------



## dick ranez (Apr 26, 2013)

Re: Future of EOS-M Lenses.
for me, there is none. even if canon improves the shoddy performance of the current model, offers more
lenses and lowers the price, I don't need, want or will purchase another "system".


----------

