# Some EOS M System Information [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 19, 2016)

```
<p>With the EOS M5 finally hitting store shelves this month, lenses will likely be the next major addition to the system. While rumors about the EOS M have been pretty quiet, we have heard a few things recently.</p>
<ul>
<li>The EF-M 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS STM will be discontinued in the not so distant future.</li>
<li>The EF-M 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM has been extremely popular in Asia, which is the #2 market for mirrorless systems.</li>
<li>The first “higher end” zoom for the EOS M system will be something like a 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, and that there are no constant aperture zooms coming in the near future.</li>
<li>We will see at least one prime lens in 2017, but that there are 3 currently being tested.</li>
</ul>
<p>As always, as soon as we hear more, we’ll pass it on.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## pokerz (Dec 19, 2016)

15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 high end zoom, good job Canon!


----------



## arcer (Dec 19, 2016)

Finally some news on the next M lens.

Even though I only played with the M5 with 18-150 from a friend for half an hour, I quite liked the photos from the new lens. Haven't had the chance of checking the RAWs on a PC though. However, the 18-150 is a 99% identical twin with the 55-200, the lens body is a bit too long for my taste.

With a rumored 15-85 on the horizon, I might just hold on for now and only buy a M5 with the 22mm for casual shoots. Also nice to see some primes are being tested. Any prime smaller or same size with the 50mm is good enough for the M system *in my opinion.*


----------



## Bob Howland (Dec 19, 2016)

pokerz said:


> 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 high end zoom, good job Canon!


+1


----------



## Act444 (Dec 19, 2016)

Wow on the 18-55 if that one turns out to be true. That said, I let mine go in favor of the 15-45 since I didn't find 18 to be wide enough on my old M. The main negative is it's only 6.3 at 45mm, somewhat noticeable difference between that and 55mm 5.6 (not extreme though). 

I think the lens I want most for the M system is a compact 35 or 50mm 2.8 IS lens (faster would be preferred if the size works out).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 19, 2016)

I'm on board for a 15-85mm EF-M lens. 

Agree that 18mm isn't really wide enough, the M11-22 is my most used M lens, and as I bring additional lenses the order is generally M55-200 > M22/2 > M18-55 > M28 macro. 

If the IQ of the M18-150 is equivalent to the M55-200, I'll consider that to replace the 18-55 and 55-200.


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 19, 2016)

With the 15-45, the 15-85 (or whatever that turns out to be) and the 18-150 there is very little point in keeping the 18-55 in production, especially as I doubt it's cheaper to make than the 15-45.


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 19, 2016)

Note that dropping the 18-55 for a 15-45 pancake is pretty much exactly what Sony did.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 19, 2016)

interesting. To me a lot depends on how compact Canon can make an EF-M 15-85/3.5-5.6 IS STM. The EF-S equivalent is a fairly large already compared to current EF-M standards. Maybe a foldable design? f/6.3 on the long end does not seem likely or attractive for a "higher level" EF-M lens. Would have preferred a constant f/4 lezoom though ... e.g. 16-55/4.0. But for the time being I am happy with 18-55. If I need wider, then typically not only 15mm, but a good deal wider = 11 (-22). 

The 3 rumored primes? If Canon is not stupid, then 35/2.0, 50/1.8 and most importantly an ultracompact EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM ... for me and millions of other buyers. Just do it, Canon! ;D 8)


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 19, 2016)

i doubt you'll see an 85mm prime aimed at a crop sensor camera, at least not until more important ranges are covered.

I would be very surprised if the three being tested aren't somewhat close to:

a) 16mm
b) 35mm 
c) 50mm

Maybe we'll see a compromise between b and c and see a 40mm f/2.8 pancake for EF-M. Personally I'd prefer 35mm and 50mm


----------



## rrcphoto (Dec 19, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> I'm on board for a 15-85mm EF-M lens.
> 
> Agree that 18mm isn't really wide enough, the M11-22 is my most used M lens, and as I bring additional lenses the order is generally M55-200 > M22/2 > M18-55 > M28 macro.
> 
> If the IQ of the M18-150 is equivalent to the M55-200, I'll consider that to replace the 18-55 and 55-200.



same!


----------



## rrcphoto (Dec 19, 2016)

jolyonralph said:


> i doubt you'll see an 85mm prime aimed at a crop sensor camera, at least not until more important ranges are covered.
> 
> I would be very surprised if the three being tested aren't somewhat close to:
> 
> ...



35 and 50 are probably no brainers. 16? doubtful. yoyu also can't get a 40mm pancake on a 18mm registration distance.

24,35,50 IS primes would be my bet .. or canon will roll with it's usual trificia:

24,28,25 IS


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 19, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> With the EOS M5 finally hitting store shelves this month, lenses will likely be the next major addition to the system. While rumors about the EOS M have been pretty quiet, we have heard a few things recently.</p>
> <ul>
> <li>The EF-M 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS STM will be discontinued in the not so distant future.</li>
> <li>The EF-M 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM has been extremely popular in Asia, which is the #2 market for mirrorless systems.</li>
> ...



Because nothing says 'higher end zoom' than a 5.6x FL multiplier, variable max aperture and STM.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 19, 2016)

It would appear that Canon will not make the same 'mistake' of offering a 17-55 f/2.8 lens or 'pulling a Sigma' and offering f/1.4 HSM primes expressly for APS-C. _When you know FF mirrorless is coming_, I guess APS-C mirrorless must remain small and light (as that brand's identity).

I'm not playing the grass-is-greener card here, but folks might consider what ecosystem could be built if there is no expectation of FF mirrorless ever arriving: a nice collection of f/1.4 and f/2 primes, and a few f/2.8 zooms. 

I'm not arguing that Canon should abandon the 'small and light' crusade with EOS-M, but for goodness sake, throw us a (native EF-M) bone here! An EF-M 32mm f/1.4 USM and a (sharp) EF-M 15-45 f/2.8 USM would do this system wonders.

- A


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 19, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Because nothing says 'higher end zoom' than a 5.6x FL multiplier, variable max aperture and STM.



Ah yes, clearly Canon are stupid for not releasing exactly the lens that you want rather than what they feel will sell better 

I'm willing to bet good money on the EF-S 15-85 selling much more than the EF-S 17-55


----------



## Jopa (Dec 19, 2016)

Count me in if the 18-85 didn't go past f/4 @ 55.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 19, 2016)

jolyonralph said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Because nothing says 'higher end zoom' than a 5.6x FL multiplier, variable max aperture and STM.
> ...



Oh, stop it, I'm not AvTvM. ;D

Of course the cheaper/slower lenses outsell the 17-55 f/2.8, I understand that. So would a $399 EF 24-120 f/5.6 lens versus the rest of the EF zooms, yet _that_ one never seems to get offered.

I'm just saying that Canon deliberately withholds higher end product from the EF-S / EF-M portfolio. And yes, you can slap EF glass on a Rebel SLR, EOS-M, I get it. But in EOS-M, I think form factor uniquely matters and folks would appreciate something deliberately made small (but of high quality) for EF-M.

Also, Canon is asking $1,100 for an M5 body. Is it reasonable to opt into a > $1k mirrorless platform that does not offer a single Canon lens over $499 unless you want to adapt something much larger and heavier? Again, I'm not arguing for a full Fuji X series of fast glass -- just a couple tailor-made EF-M nicer lenses to inject life into the platform.

- A


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 19, 2016)

I think the lack of a serious range of EF-M prime lenses does tend to point towards the probability of a FF EF-M range of lenses in the future.

Of course, there's no reason that new EF-M prime lenses (eg 50mm f/1.8) couldn't be full-frame capable for when they do eventually launch a FF mirrorless.


----------



## Rocky (Dec 19, 2016)

I wish Canon will make an IS version of the 22/2.0 EF-M. even It may be 1/2 inch longer. It is still worth it.


----------



## pokerz (Dec 19, 2016)

More and more lens for mirrorless
Time to kill DSLR, Canon!


----------



## gmrza (Dec 20, 2016)

jolyonralph said:


> I think the lack of a serious range of EF-M prime lenses does tend to point towards the probability of a FF EF-M range of lenses in the future.
> 
> Of course, there's no reason that new EF-M prime lenses (eg 50mm f/1.8) couldn't be full-frame capable for when they do eventually launch a FF mirrorless.



Either that, or Canon is having trouble with peripheral illumination on the M series, due to the sharper angle of incidence of light reaching the sensor.

Photozone, in at least one of its lens reviews points to the possibility that Canon may have a problem with its APS-C sensors in that they cannot handle light coming from a very oblique angle of incidence:
[quote author=photozone]Unfortunately vignetting is a massive weakness - again. We have seen this problem in our previous EF-M reviews so by now we are pretty confident to state that this isn't solely a lens issue. It seems as if Canon just took their APS-C sensor developed for some of their DSLRs and this just wasn't the smartest thing to do due to much closer distance to the lens' rear element. It seems as if the sensor doesn't like the more extreme light angles towards the corners.
The "raw" light falloff is shockingly high. At 15mm @ f.3.5, the Canon lens holds the new negative record (again) with a whopping 3.6EV(!!!). This is more than double our usual scale for APS-C format lenses! Even at f/11, you can observe a falloff of ~1.4EV (f-stops). The situation isn't quite as bad at 28mm where f/5.6 is sufficient to solve most of the issue. At 45mm it isn't overly relevant anymore.
[/quote]

This problem obviously gets worse at larger apertures. This makes me wonder if Canon has a bit of work to do on its sensors before a faster lens is workable. - Hence the research into curved sensors. One of Canon's patents in this area seems to be focused around combating vignetting.


----------



## Rocky (Dec 20, 2016)

The curved sensor will make ALL the existing lens become USELESS. Time to buy all new lenses.


----------



## gmrza (Dec 20, 2016)

Rocky said:


> The curved sensor will make ALL the existing lens become USELESS. Time to buy all new lenses.



True. Canon will probably need to look at other ways to improve peripheral illumination.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 20, 2016)

Rocky said:


> The curved sensor will make ALL the existing lens become USELESS. Time to buy all new lenses.



You do realize that for precisely that reason, Canon won't offer a curved sensor unless the business will fail without it. Consider the attached...

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 20, 2016)

Rocky said:


> The curved sensor will make ALL the existing lens become USELESS. Time to buy all new lenses.



The more recent patent was for a sensor with dynamically controlled curvature, which presumably could be flat for existing lenses and curved by varying amounts to accommodate appropriately-designed new lenses.


----------



## Zv (Dec 20, 2016)

I thought about picking up a used EF-m 18-55 once but it just didn't appeal to me all that much so not bothered if they discontinue it. The newer 18-150 is more appealing thanks to the extra on the long end. It could pull double duty as my telephoto and walk around and complement the 11-22 nicely for a compact kit. 

I've come to the conclusion (sadly) that I'm a zoom lens kinda guy and not really into primes. IQ is good enough and the flexibility is more useful than getting an extra stop or two of light. Even if Canon brought out another EF-m prime I'd probably go the zoom route with either 18-150 or the rumored 15-85.


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 20, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> You do realize that for precisely that reason, Canon won't offer a curved sensor unless the business will fail without it. Consider the attached...



Oh, I'm so glad you weren't offering Canon advice back in 1986


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 20, 2016)

Anyway... the suggestion is that an adjustable curved sensor will

a) be able to take normal EF lenses

b) work better with new lenses that will only work with this new camera.

So, consequently you will be able to use your existing lenses but still will feel the eventual need to buy new lenses to replace your existing ones.

Smart canon.


----------



## rrcphoto (Dec 20, 2016)

curved sensors are probably for the future powershot line of cameras.

back to the M.. the M most specifically the M3 had a huge problem with vignetting and color casting.

they have a ton of work to do before making faster lenses, or lenses with a higher incident angle that hit the sensor plane.

the problem there is that they have to feel they can sell enough M's to make a custom sensor worth while.

they have for instance, offset microlens patent applications for a while now, so they are certainly thinking about the issue.

I wouldn't be surprised that we don't get really fast primes for the M, that we get f2 primes.

Oh and a 15-85mm .. I'd love it. Count me in on a preorder of that baby, especially if it's another special M lens.

Going by the 18-150, it's going to be special.

and for those complaining about 6.3 .. that's 1/3 an EV over the normal 5.6 .. you really going to miss it?


----------



## rrcphoto (Dec 20, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I'm just saying that Canon deliberately withholds higher end product from the EF-S / EF-M portfolio. And yes, you can slap EF glass on a Rebel SLR, EOS-M, I get it. But in EOS-M, I think form factor uniquely matters and folks would appreciate something deliberately made small (but of high quality) for EF-M.
> 
> Also, Canon is asking $1,100 for an M5 body. Is it reasonable to opt into a > $1k mirrorless platform that does not offer a single Canon lens over $499 unless you want to adapt something much larger and heavier? Again, I'm not arguing for a full Fuji X series of fast glass -- just a couple tailor-made EF-M nicer lenses to inject life into the platform.
> 
> - A



not all canon lenses are larger and heavier.

the 50mm STM is no different in size to the Sony E mount 50mm 1.8

the 24,28,35mm IS USM primes are small and lightweight.

the 40mm is fairly small and lightweight.

while I'm getting the fact that upscale primes etc are needed,it's not as if they don't already exist in the canon ecosystem.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 20, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> I'm on board for a 15-85mm EF-M lens.
> 
> Agree that 18mm isn't really wide enough, the M11-22 is my most used M lens, and as I bring additional lenses the order is generally M55-200 > M22/2 > M18-55 > M28 macro.
> 
> If the IQ of the M18-150 is equivalent to the M55-200, I'll consider that to replace the 18-55 and 55-200.



For my usage, M22/2 >> M11-22 > M55-200 > M18-55 > M28 macro. I wanted to like the 18-55, but it's too slow indoors and the small max aperture doesn't diffuse the background enough. Perhaps, I'd use the 15-85 more than the 18-55, but I'd have to try the M5 first. Right now, I'd much rather carry the DSLR than the EOS-M. The M is used when DSLRs aren't allowed...


----------



## hendrik-sg (Dec 20, 2016)

jolyonralph said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Because nothing says 'higher end zoom' than a 5.6x FL multiplier, variable max aperture and STM.
> ...



I think similar, the 17-55 is from a different time, when APS-C was the standard and FF exotic. Just from the pure spec perspective, a 80d with 17-55 is quite similar lika a 6d with 24-105, in size and weight and price as well. So most people would prefer the 6d, because all the fast primes are really nice (and equivalently even faster) on FF.

EF-M is even more about size and weight than a APS-C DLSR, so i think the market for big and heavy fast lenses is even more limited than for APS-C.

This is why i do not really see a BIG market for FF mirrorless, except with pancakes the system gets as big as a normal FF DSLR. Attach a 1kg lens and a flash to any camera, and it's really nice to have the bigger form with solid grip which a 5d offers.


----------



## Act444 (Dec 20, 2016)

Random Orbits said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I'm on board for a 15-85mm EF-M lens.
> ...



That basically summarizes my use of the M system as well (also, to travel light if space is limited) - and for that, it does the job really well... I can shoot RAW and thus keep my workflow identical to if I'd used any of my 5D cameras...

Next on the list will be that 18-150...I just hope the performance is up to snuff and justifies its high(!) price.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 20, 2016)

Act444 said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Similar, but I'd add when bringing a dSLR isn't practical as opposed to just not allowed. The M kit has become my default for casual family outings and family travel to familar destinations. Even on major trips (e.g. a family trip to Switzerland, France and Germany last year), while I took both the dSLR and the M kits, the dSLR was only used on my few solo nighttime outings, it was the M kit that I brought with us most of the time.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 20, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > Random Orbits said:
> ...



+1 with Neuro,

I used to carry 1dx with L lenses. I now 100% mirrorless user. I do have some large mirrorless lenses, but fast compact primes are the ones I carry with me. Love the tilt screen, 90% in my shooting.

Can't wait to see Canon FF mirrorless.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 20, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Similar, but I'd add when bringing a dSLR isn't practical as opposed to just not allowed. The M kit has become my default for casual family outings and family travel to familar destinations. Even on major trips (e.g. a family trip to Switzerland, France and Germany last year), while I took both the dSLR and the M kits, the dSLR was only used on my few solo nighttime outings, it was the M kit that I brought with us most of the time.



This is why my next camera (and I haven't bought one since my 5D3 in 2012) is probably going to be one of the following:


Leica Q
RX1R II
The next gen of the Fuji X100 line
Canon's first FF mirrorless rig: with a fixed 28mm or 35mm lens 

I see a small (but not necessarily APS-C) fixed lens rig, even with a quick f/2 FF lens on it, as saving a ton of space in my bag versus the SLR for a deceptive reason. It will probably take up a similar amount of space as my 5D3 with my small 28mm or 35mm IS primes on them. But I think the allure of a fixed lens rig for an overthinker like me is that _there's zero opportunity to overdo it and bring more glass_. I find that opportunity refreshing.

- A


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 20, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Similar, but I'd add when bringing a dSLR isn't practical as opposed to just not allowed. The M kit has become my default for casual family outings and family travel to familar destinations. Even on major trips (e.g. a family trip to Switzerland, France and Germany last year), while I took both the dSLR and the M kits, the dSLR was only used on my few solo nighttime outings, it was the M kit that I brought with us most of the time.
> ...



Did have a chance playing with rx1r II couple days, just amazing little guy.

My current are: a7rII, a7sII and recently added a6500 as an outdoor sports cam. All these cams have eye AF. Shooting f1.4 primes @ f1.4 is easy. Hope Canon FF mirrorless will have Eye AF.


----------



## gmrza (Dec 20, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> curved sensors are probably for the future powershot line of cameras.
> 
> back to the M.. the M most specifically the M3 had a huge problem with vignetting and color casting.
> 
> ...



Catch 22!

If Canon doesn't build fast lenses, the customers won't come. If the customers don't come, Canon won't build the fast lenses....

Without taking a risk and building a custom sensor for the M series, Canon will have to try its luck at building volume in the lower end of the market.
That said, this problem has to be dealt with before bringing a full frame mirrorless camera to market - in that space, the problem will be even more pronounced.


----------



## dak723 (Dec 21, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I'm just saying that Canon deliberately withholds higher end product from the EF-S / EF-M portfolio.



My guess is that they withhold higher end products from the EF-S / EF-M lines because they know that there aren't anywhere near enough buyers for high end products for those lines. The high end lenses are purchased by the consumers that have the high end FF cameras. If I had to guess, I would guess that the target audience for the EF-M is for Rebel users wanting to go mirrorless for their new camera.


----------



## rrcphoto (Dec 21, 2016)

gmrza said:


> Catch 22!
> 
> If Canon doesn't build fast lenses, the customers won't come. If the customers don't come, Canon won't build the fast lenses....
> 
> ...



except the customers are already coming.

Canon is by far the largest ILC company out there. 

they are also #2 in mirrorless this year.

fast primes don't fit in that much with volume.

the company that people think most of when it comes to mirrorless and primes is Fuji.. and they have one of the lowest marketshares out there.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 21, 2016)

really funny the constant bashing of Canon EF-M lens lineup. And the constant whimpering for fast primes for a *CROP SENSOR* system. It is not going to happen. Not even Canon is so stupid to make big, fat, expensive lenses for EF-M mount. EF-M lens lineup is pretty much *perfect*, especially now with 18-150 coming and a slightly higher grade EF-M 15-85 in the works (hopefully). All that's missing is a compact EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS.  

Fast primes will come, but only if & when Canon launches FF-sensored MILC with new, native, short-flange distance EF-X mount.


----------



## Eagle Eye (Dec 21, 2016)

[/quote]

That basically summarizes my use of the M system as well (also, to travel light if space is limited) - and for that, it does the job really well... I can shoot RAW and thus keep my workflow identical to if I'd used any of my 5D cameras...

Next on the list will be that 18-150...I just hope the performance is up to snuff and justifies its high(!) price.
[/quote]

I suspect that when the full frame mirrorless comes, it's going to be rocking EF lenses. Mirrorless is the future. It's not 100% here yet, but I suspect Canon knows that the future of all ILCs is a mirrorless system. In a few years, new photographers are going to have the option of the iPhone or the ILC, the mirrorless term gone absent the need for distinction. It wouldn't surprise me if the 6D Mark II was mirrorless, but I suspect we're still a few years away from Canon merging the lines.
By the way, I've been using the M5 for the last few days with a Rokinon 50mm and my old EF-M zooms. It's a totally killer camera. Smarter capabilities than my 6D, great low light capability, and very snappy autofocus (not saying all that much in comparison to the 6D, but it is really good). Like Neuro, I pretty much only shoot M these days, unless I'm driving on a photo trip by myself and can lug my L kit. The upgrade from the M2 to the M5 is probably the death knell for my 6D/L zoom kit.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 21, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Not even Canon is so stupid to make big, fat, expensive lenses for EF-M mount. EF-M lens lineup is pretty much *perfect*, especially now with 18-150 coming and a slightly higher grade EF-M 15-85 in the works (hopefully).



1) If you design it expressly for crop, it doesn't need to be so big and fat. See attached. That Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for crop is just about as big as a 35mm f/2 IS USM or 50mm f/1.4 USM. That's not huge at all. Drop it to f/1.8 or f/2 and it will be even smaller.

2) A lineup consisting of 5x and 8x f/6.3 zooms is perfect like a 24-600mm bridge camera is perfect: you can puff up your chest and say 'I've got focal lengths X all the way to Y covered', but you can't generate small DOF, IQ is questionable and you have to love lots of plastic. 

Again, I'm not arguing we blow up the EF-M portfolio, I'm arguing we should jazz it up. Canon could drop a couple well-targeted lenses in the $750 neighborhood to go with that shiny new $1,100 camera they just released. Inject some enthusiast energy into the brand, you know?

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 21, 2016)

Eagle Eye said:


> Like Neuro, I pretty much only shoot M these days, unless I'm driving on a photo trip by myself and can lug my L kit.



Perhaps an overstatement for me. Most of my shots are still with the 1D X, family around the house and locally, typical business trips, etc. The M is mainly for family travel and saving space on short trips.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Eagle Eye said:
> 
> 
> > Like Neuro, I pretty much only shoot M these days, unless I'm driving on a photo trip by myself and can lug my L kit.
> ...



+1. Short trips are my unmet need, especially my frequent 48 hour business trips where I don't want to lug a large 5D3 + 28mm f/2.8 IS around. Think: no shooting planned, but _hey_, I'm in [insert city] and we've got an hour before a meeting for a city walkabout, a random snap out the side of a plane, etc. I've honestly considered opting in to an older EOS M model + the 22mm f/2 pancake just for that very need.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 21, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> 2) A lineup consisting of 5x and 8x f/6.3 zooms is perfect like a 24-600mm bridge camera is perfect: you can puff up your chest and say 'I've got focal lengths X all the way to Y covered', but you can't generate small DOF, IQ is questionable and you have to love lots of plastic.



using 55-200 @ f/6.3 DOF is more than shallow, even on APS-C sensor. No Problem at all. And yes, we can cover 11mm to 200mm with only 3 small, decent and inexpensive lenses. Thanks to adapter, EF 40/2.8 STM and EF 50/1.8/STM the only CROP lens missing in my bag is a native, compact and decent EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM. 

Only 1% market share Fuji retro nerds are willing to buy f/1.2 *crop sensor-only lenses* for a system without future. Canon often acts stupidly, but not even they are that stupid. Their multi-million market research has clearly told them, that me and millions of (potential) EOS M buyers will definitely NOT shell out 800 /€ for a crop-only prime lens. heck, we are not even willing to spend that much money on FF *prime* lenses. We spend a bit more and get ourselves FF-capable f/2.8 zooms for a grand or 2 and are done with it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 21, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> 1) If you design it expressly for crop, it doesn't need to be so big and fat. See attached. That Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for crop is just about as big as a 35mm f/2 IS USM or 50mm f/1.4 USM. That's not huge at all. Drop it to f/1.8 or f/2 and it will be even smaller.



The 35 f2 IS is not a small lens, the 28 f2.8 IS is much much smaller.


----------



## Act444 (Dec 21, 2016)

The DSLR will always be my first option, my first choice, especially now that mine are all FF. When I see the quality I'm getting out of these cameras, I don't mind carrying the weight. However, as most of us know, a DSLR isn't always practical on every outing. Therefore I've invested in the M system as the "travel light" option, the "inconspicuous" option and the "no professional cameras allowed" option. I also initially got it as a camera to give to people when I want to get in the shot, but as I mentioned in an earlier post I find I just take the DSLR for my personal pics and hand people my phone instead...

Now, if Canon came out with a fixed lens FF compact camera, much like the RX1R (a camera I've considered in the past) THAT might get me to leave the DSLR at home more frequently...


----------



## Act444 (Dec 21, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > 1) If you design it expressly for crop, it doesn't need to be so big and fat. See attached. That Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for crop is just about as big as a 35mm f/2 IS USM or 50mm f/1.4 USM. That's not huge at all. Drop it to f/1.8 or f/2 and it will be even smaller.
> ...



Speaking of the 28mm, I used to pair one with a Rebel SL1 and loved it. Nice little combo and very good IQ. 

Now I'm hoping for the EF-M equivalent. Not crazy about the decision to make the 28 Macro an f3.5 instead of 2.8...


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 21, 2016)

Act444 said:


> Now I'm hoping for the EF-M equivalent. Not crazy about the decision to make the 28 Macro an f3.5 instead of 2.8...


well, it is a Macro lens. Difference in both light-gathering and DOF 2.8 to 3.5 is negligable for all applications of a 28mm lens. For use as a macro lens even more so. Think about it ...


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 21, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > 1) If you design it expressly for crop, it doesn't need to be so big and fat. See attached. That Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for crop is just about as big as a 35mm f/2 IS USM or 50mm f/1.4 USM. That's not huge at all. Drop it to f/1.8 or f/2 and it will be even smaller.
> ...



AvTvM made it sound like all f/1.4 lenses are big like the 35L II. The 35mm f/2 IS isn't tiny, but it also isn't large in my book -- I consider a fair 'size price to pay' for what it offers. Canon would do well to find that size/performance inflection point if it wants to keep things small.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 21, 2016)

I know, that mirrorless short flange distance lenses can be built very compact. 

Fujifilm XR 35/1.4 is not much larger than Canon EF-M 28/3.5 macro. http://j.mp/2hIMmC3
BUT, a hell of a lot more expensive - lowest street price in Germany is currently around € 570 ... ! How will buy such a lens for crop only? 1% market share - Fuji! Economy is simple. Even stupid Canon has understood this with their EF-S lenses. 17-55/2.8 was the absolute max. to get a few buyers, because it is a good and immensely useful constant aperture zoom. They had to replace 10-22 with 11-18 just to get a significantly lower price UWA. Definitely NO GO for fast CROP primes. 


What I'd love to see is a compact Canon EOS X1 MILC with FF sensor and (amongst other lenses) a native EF-X 50/1.8 STM for it - same size, same price as the EF lens. If IS is added, charge 50 bucks more. Done, sold! 

Until then I will ABSOLUTELY ONLY buy small, decent, inexpensive EF-M lenses for a CROP sensor - preferably zooms and for maximum portability situations a few moderately slow primes. EF-M 22/2 and EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM.


----------



## Act444 (Dec 22, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > Now I'm hoping for the EF-M equivalent. Not crazy about the decision to make the 28 Macro an f3.5 instead of 2.8...
> ...



For macro use, perhaps...but I was using that SL1/28mm in low-light conditions - flash/dragging shutter, etc. I REALLY appreciated the 2.8 in those circumstances. So, in those situations, YES - losing 2/3 stop would make quite the difference for me. YMMV!

In my opinion, when it comes to crop-sensor cameras, anything slower than 2.8 is a liability when it comes to indoor shooting.


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 23, 2016)

There are already plenty of f/2.8 and faster solutions for EF-M if you use standard EF lenses with the EF/EF-M adaptor.

Having said that, a f/2.8 35mm lens would be compact and very very handy. Give me a slightly slower but lighter and shorter lens option for EF-M rather than just replicate what already exists on EF please.


----------



## pokerz (Dec 25, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> really funny the constant bashing of Canon EF-M lens lineup. And the constant whimpering for fast primes for a *CROP SENSOR* system. It is not going to happen. Not even Canon is so stupid to make big, fat, expensive lenses for EF-M mount. EF-M lens lineup is pretty much *perfect*, especially now with 18-150 coming and a slightly higher grade EF-M 15-85 in the works (hopefully). All that's missing is a compact EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS.
> 
> Fast primes will come, but only if & when Canon launches FF-sensored MILC with new, native, short-flange distance EF-X mount.


EFX? what's that, how u confirm it does exist?


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 25, 2016)

pokerz said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > really funny the constant bashing of Canon EF-M lens lineup. And the constant whimpering for fast primes for a *CROP SENSOR* system. It is not going to happen. Not even Canon is so stupid to make big, fat, expensive lenses for EF-M mount. EF-M lens lineup is pretty much *perfect*, especially now with 18-150 coming and a slightly higher grade EF-M 15-85 in the works (hopefully). All that's missing is a compact EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS.
> ...



"EF-X" is my moniker for an (eventually coming) future Canon lens mount and native lenses for an (eventually coming) future Canon FF-sensored mirrorless camera series. Canon may well decide on some other naming convention. But the products themselves will come. Eventually.


----------

