# Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 17, 2014)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/06/canon-ef-m-55-200-f4-5-6-3-is-stm-gets-official/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/06/canon-ef-m-55-200-f4-5-6-3-is-stm-gets-official/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><span style="color: #222222;">United Kingdom, Republic of Ireland, 17 June 2014 – Canon today announces a new addition to its EF-M lens range with the introduction of its first dedicated telephoto zoom lens – the EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM. Designed for Canon’s Compact System Camera, the EOS M, the new EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM features Canon’s signature optical performance, advanced Stepping Motor Technology (STM), a 3.5-stop optical Image Stabilizer, and provides a versatile 55-200mm focal range to help users get closer to the subjects they love</span><br style="color: #222222;" /><span style="color: #222222;"> </span><br style="color: #222222;" /><b style="color: #222222;">Taking you closer</b><br style="color: #222222;" /><span style="color: #222222;">The EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM joins three existing lenses in the EF-M range, which together offer a diverse variety of focal lengths from 11-200mm. The perfect addition to any EOS M kit bag, the new lens opens additional creative possibilities for EOS M shooters through its suitability to capture a wide selection of scenes – from eye-catching portraits at 55mm, to wildlife at 200mm.</span><br style="color: #222222;" /><span style="color: #222222;"> </span><br style="color: #222222;" /><b style="color: #222222;">Leading optical technologies for incredible images</b><br style="color: #222222;" /><span style="color: #222222;">Developed using the company’s unparalleled optical expertise, the EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM features Canon’s powerful optical Image Stabilizer and STM technology to deliver outstanding levels of detail when shooting stills and movies. When shooting movies specifically, STM technology ensures smooth focus transitions, as focus shifts from one subject to another. The STM mechanism also provides near-silent focusing, giving videographers the ability to shoot movie soundtracks which capture the natural ambience of the scene in front of them. Additionally, thanks to a highly-effective 3.5-stop optical Image Stabilizer, which reduces visible camera shake, users can also shoot sharp stills while using the zoom, and steady movies while capturing action.</span><br style="color: #222222;" /><span style="color: #222222;"> </span><br style="color: #222222;" /><b style="color: #222222;">Designed to make great photography easy</b><br style="color: #222222;" /><span style="color: #222222;">Constructed of a high quality metal exterior – a trademark of the EF-M lens range – the EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM is also compact, lightweight and portable, making it ideal for everyday use. Inside the lens, an Ultra-low Dispersion (UD) element delivers outstanding image quality throughout the zoom range. Furthermore, its non-rotating front element makes it easy to maintain a consistent effect when using filters, and the full-time manual focus ring offers greater creative freedom to adjust focus during shooting.</span><br style="color: #222222;" /><span style="color: #222222;"> </span><br style="color: #222222;" /><b style="color: #222222;">Key Features</b></p>
<ul>
<li>Get closer to the action with your EOS-M camera</li>
<li>Image Stabilizer keeps images sharp</li>
<li>Compact enough to go anywhere</li>
<li>Smooth, near-silent STM focusing</li>
<li>Make quick adjustments with a manual focus ring</li>
<li>Shoot great quality images – full of sharp details and rich colour</li>
</ul>
<p>Detailed specs are after the break.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/canon-ef-m-55-200mm-f45-63-is-stm-lens-construction_0.png"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-16714" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/canon-ef-m-55-200mm-f45-63-is-stm-lens-construction_0.png" alt="canon-ef-m-55-200mm-f45-63-is-stm-lens-construction_0" width="348" height="261" /></a></p>
<p> </p>
<table style="color: #000000;">
<tbody style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Angle of view (horizontal, vertical, diagonal)</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">23 ° 20 ‘~ 6 ° 30′ · 15 ° 40 ‘~ 4 ° 20′ · 27 ° 50 ‘~ 7 ° 50′</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Lens constitution</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">17 pieces in 11 groups</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Number of blades diaphragm</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">7 pieces</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Minimum aperture</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">2-32</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Minimum focusing distance</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">1m</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Maximum magnification</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">0.21 times</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Filter diameter</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">52mm</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Maximum length × diameter</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">φ60.9 × 86.5 mm</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Weight</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">260g</td>
</tr>
<tr style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit;">
<th style="font-style: inherit;">Camera shake compensation effect</th>
<td style="font-style: inherit;">3.5 stops</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/canon-ef-m-55-200mm-f45-63-is-stm-mtf-chart.png"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-16715" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/canon-ef-m-55-200mm-f45-63-is-stm-mtf-chart-575x400.png" alt="canon-ef-m-55-200mm-f45-63-is-stm-mtf-chart" width="575" height="400" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Source: [<a href="http://www.canon.co.nz/en-NZ/Personal/Products/Cameras-and-Accessories/Compact-System-Cameras/EF-M-55-200mm-f45-63-IS-STM" target="_blank">Canon NZ</a>]</strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Antono Refa (Jun 17, 2014)

Seems Canon is going the 3rd party way, and makes the max aperture at the longest end f/6.3, rather than f/5.6


----------



## SpartanII (Jun 17, 2014)

I wonder if the price will come in at the $400-$500 range such as the EF-M 11-22mm?


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 17, 2014)

SpartanII said:


> I wonder if the price will come in at the $400-$500 range such as the EF-M 11-22mm?


listed as 49000 yen which would be around 480 USD.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 17, 2014)

Antono Refa said:


> Seems Canon is going the 3rd party way, and makes the max aperture at the longest end f/6.3, rather than f/5.6


I suppose this is just with the EOS-M system, to keep the advantages of its small size.
Also the max aperture got smaller at minimum lenght. And this allows Canon to use a front element with smaller diameter.
I don't believe that Canon will do this wit EF-S lenses. Exept - maybe - with the super-zooms.


----------



## noncho (Jun 17, 2014)

Could be a good compact travel telephoto, but I would not pay much for it.

Where are 135 2.8 and 85 2.0 and 50 1.4 for M? Come on Canon, we need some nice primes!


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 17, 2014)

Maximilian said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > Seems Canon is going the 3rd party way, and makes the max aperture at the longest end f/6.3, rather than f/5.6
> ...



this thing is pretty tiny at 60.9 × 86.5mm.

To put it in perspective - it's around the same size as the EF-S 18-55mm IS II and the 55-250mm IS STM seems huge at 70.0 x 111.2mm.


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

leak in Switzerland: http://www.fotointern.ch/archiv/2014/06/17/canon-ef-m-4-5-6-355-200mm-is-stm-fuer-die-eos-m-und-die-naehe-zum-motiv/

3.5 stop IS
STM
1 UD lens element
non-turning front element

List price: CHF 398,- [approx. USD 442 / € 327 ] ... will probably mean: USD 399,- / € 369,-
delivery: "expected July 2014"


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

EF-M 55-200 with specs is also listed on Canon Europe homepage:
http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/EF-M/EF_M_55-200mm_f_4.5_6.3_IS_STM/


Image size	APS-C
35mm film equivalent focal length (mm)	88-320
Angle of view (horzntl, vertl, diagnl)	23°20′ - 6°30′ / 15°40′ - 4°20′ / 27°50′ - 7°50′
*Lens construction (elements/groups)	17/11
No. of diaphragm blades	7*
Minimum aperture	22-32¹
*Closest focussing distance (m)	1.0
Maximum magnification (x)	0.21 (at 200mm)*
Distance Information	Yes
*Image stabilizer	3.5*
AF actuator	STM
*Filter diameter (mm) 52*
*Max. diameter x length (mm)	60.9 x 86.5
Weight (g)	260*
Lens Cap	E-52 II
Lens hood	ET-54B
Lens case/pouch	LP816
Lens Dust Cap E


----------



## jhanken (Jun 17, 2014)

Getting more excited about the EOS-M platform. The two lenses I have (22mm, and 18-55mm) have impressed me. I am looking forward at some point to the 11-22mm and this new dedicated telezoom. My future trips to exotic locals (or at least interesting) are open to fun photography without pissing off the wife. ++good.


----------



## Zv (Jun 17, 2014)

I never bothered with the EF-M 18-55 but I felt the need for something in the telephoto range to compliment the 35mm focal length equiv of the 22/2. This lens is perfect as a lightweight alternative for parties and small events where I can't be bothered lugging the big dog around. 

Am I getting excited about an EF-M lens release?? What the heck is happening to me? 

That makes three pretty solid zooms for the M mount. Now all we need is a couple more primes please!


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 17, 2014)

rrcphoto said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > Antono Refa said:
> ...


Thanks, rrcphoto, for adding the dimensions of the lens.
That's what I meant: keeping it tiny to get full advantage of the M system small size.


----------



## Kathode-Ray (Jun 17, 2014)

YESSSS, finally a tele for the M! Great news.

But... is that a plastic lens mount I see on the NZ website?? Or just black metal?


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

Overall a good sign, meaning Canon has not given up on EOS-M system yet. 
Will be interesting to see, what Canon's will do regarding their mirrorless APS-C offering ... 

1. Will the EF-M 55-200 be offered in US? 
The lens is featured on the Canon Europe homepage and on Japan, China and other Asian homepages. But not (yet?) on US homepage.
We will know the answer quite soon. 

2. Will EOS M2 be offered in Europe too? In US?
Currently open to anybody's guess. Personally, I don't think so.

3. Will there be an M3?
same thing as now, just with DPAF 70D sensor + AF? 
Or higher end, with EVF ... as a fully capable Fuji XT-1 competitor?
and when?
And if so ... will it be offered in Japan/China only? Or Asia? Europe? US? 

My best case scenario would be a surprise "killer EOS-M3" announced in August/for photokina ... fully competitive mirrorless APS-C body [+system] in terms of sensor, AF performance, EVF, battery charge. Don't think it will happen, though. More likely, Canon will continue to snooze and lose ... and continue to watch how Sony and Fuji are nibbling away at their APS-C market share.


----------



## Zv (Jun 17, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Overall a good sign, meaning Canon has not given up on EOS-M system yet.
> Will be interesting to see, what Canon's will do regarding their mirrorless APS-C offering ...
> 
> 1. Will the EF-M 55-200 be offered in US?
> ...



Some good questions there. I think this is an interesting situation we find ourselves in. If it is indeed released in the US it would be strange and raise Qs like "why not the 11-22mm or why not the M2??" but if they stick to their guns and say "no thanks" that's essentially the end of the M in the US. 

I have a feeling it will be Euro / Asia only. Otherwise there will HAVE to be a US release of the other stuff. Then they'd look stupid because it wasn't good enough for them the first time round. 

I still think they should have shipped the 11-22 over there. Seems like a damn good lens and in demand. 

The M2 is not really worthy of the name since all it has is faster AF and wifi / gps. Things that shoulda been in the first one really. I have a feeling the real M2 (M3) will be a global release and that's what US and Europe are waiting on? Who knows when that's coming. They'll prob wait until the 70D has aged a bit and 7D2 is out too before adding DPAF in the M.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 17, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Overall a good sign, meaning Canon has not given up on EOS-M system yet.


Well said. And It's giving us hope for the future.



> Will be interesting to see, what Canon's will do regarding their mirrorless APS-C offering ...
> 
> 1. Will the EF-M 55-200 be offered in US?
> The lens is featured on the Canon Europe homepage and on Japan, China and other Asian homepages. But not (yet?) on US homepage.
> ...


Difficult to say. I am not willing to make any guess on both points.
But it seems, that Canon US has no confidence in EOS M, and why should have the consumers then...?
Wrong sign IMHO.



> 3. Will there be an M3?
> same thing as now, just with DPAF 70D sensor + AF?
> Or higher end, with EVF ... as a fully capable Fuji XT-1 competitor?
> and when?
> And if so ... will it be offered in Japan/China only? Or Asia? Europe? US?


My guess here is that an EOS M3 will be an evolution of M and M2:
Same size, better sensor, better AF, hopefully an optional EVF like the G1 X M2.
But nothing more. And this will be a bit disappointing again.
But still a much more interesting aproach to this market segment than M and M2, 
especially if EVF is included.
And maybe then Canon US is overthinking their strategy in almost ignoring EOS M.



> My best case scenario would be a surprise "killer EOS-M3" announced in August/for photokina ... fully competitive mirrorless APS-C body [+system] in terms of sensor, AF performance, EVF, battery charge. Don't think it will happen, though. More likely, Canon will continue to snooze and lose ... and continue to watch how Sony and Fuji are nibbling away at their APS-C market share.


Would be nice, but I would be very surprised (positively), if that would happen.
When I look at the Oly OMD E1, I think "I want this sort of camera! But with a bigger sensor. And a Canon user interface."


----------



## noncho (Jun 17, 2014)

400$ for 55-200 6.3 kit telephoto zoom?

Are they out of their minds?


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

Now we have a price for Europe: € 329,- 
http://www.photoscala.de/Artikel/EF-M-45-6355-200-mm-IS-STM

If optical performance is on par with the EF-S 55-250 STM, then it is well worth the money. 
Provided, one cares for a f/4.5-6.3 lens ... with only 1 dated camera body available to mount it on.


----------



## dufflover (Jun 17, 2014)

ehh I'm not so sure on this one. I'm kinda disappointed Canon has started to go the f/6.3 route on the tele end, and 200mm is not even that long. I sure hope it is a big chunk smaller than the 55-250mm IS STM because I gotta say that has more appeal as being longer, slightly faster (hey can use that 1/3 stop to improve IQ slightly) and possibly not that much bigger - in the sense that they both may cross the line in terms of requiring a certain sized bag, etc.


----------



## bainsybike (Jun 17, 2014)

It has appeared on the Canon UK website, so I suppose that means it will be available over here.  No price that I can find though. And it does look like a plastic mount.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jun 17, 2014)

Maximilian said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > Seems Canon is going the 3rd party way, and makes the max aperture at the longest end f/6.3, rather than f/5.6
> ...



Indeed.



Maximilian said:


> I don't believe that Canon will do this with EF-S lenses. Exept - maybe - with the super-zooms.



Nikon makes an 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DX, I wouldn't be surprised if Canon followed suit.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 17, 2014)

dufflover said:


> ehh I'm not so sure on this one. I'm kinda disappointed Canon has started to go the f/6.3 route on the tele end, and 200mm is not even that long. I sure hope it is a big chunk smaller than the 55-250mm IS STM because I gotta say that has more appeal as being longer, slightly faster (hey can use that 1/3 stop to improve IQ slightly) and possibly not that much bigger - in the sense that they both may cross the line in terms of requiring a certain sized bag, etc.



The EF-M 50-200 is 22% shorter and 30% lighter than the EF-S 55-250. That's comparing bare lenses, but since you need the EF Mount Adapter to use the EF-S lens, in practical use the new M telezoom is 38% shorter and 46% lighter.


----------



## Angmar (Jun 17, 2014)

First EF-M lens with plastic mount. ???


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

Angmar said:


> First EF-M lens with plastic mount. ???



so what ... it won't hurt optical performance nor durability. It's a convenience consumer lens at an affordable price. 
People who insist on metal mounts can get the all-metal EF-M/EF adapter and mount their full metal jacket L lenses. Or pay 1 grand a pop for Fuji X-lenses or Sony FE-"Zeiss"-pancakes. 

I'd have happily traded the savings from plastic vs. metal mount against 1 stop more light though. ;-)


----------



## mackguyver (Jun 17, 2014)

Zv said:


> I never bothered with the EF-M 18-55


It's actually better than you might think - nice metal build quality, the IS works well, and it's sharper than the DxO charts would indicate. My preferred carry method for this camera is actually to have the body capped, um, body in one pocket and the 18-55 in the other. When I'm ready to shoot, I just assemble them...

I'm considering the 11-22, but this little telephoto seems like it would be nice for travel as well. If only it had a viewfinder, it would be the perfect travel camera. Maybe the M3...


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 17, 2014)

noncho said:


> 400$ for 55-200 6.3 kit telephoto zoom?
> 
> Are they out of their minds?



because that 1/3 of a stop difference between 6.3 and 5.6 is going to make a huge difference in price.


----------



## Angmar (Jun 17, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Angmar said:
> 
> 
> > First EF-M lens with plastic mount. ???
> ...



I really don't bother. I just thought that it was odd when the others have metal mounts.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 17, 2014)

rrcphoto said:


> noncho said:
> 
> 
> > 400$ for 55-200 6.3 kit telephoto zoom?
> ...



That 1/3-stop means a 20% reduction in the size of the front element, so yes...that could make quite a significant difference in both lens size and cost. That's something Tamron, Sigma, etc., have done for years (although they then have to 'spoof' the AF system to show the lens as f/5.6).


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

Angmar said:


> I really don't bother. I just thought that it was odd when the others have metal mounts.



yep, I agree. Even though I don't really mind plastic mounts on cheap lenses, a metal mount would have been "nicer" and in line with the other, rather well constructed lenses in the EF-M range. Even the EF-M 18-55 kit zoom got a metal mount, as opposed to the EF-S 18-55 STM (plastic). 

But again, a rather superficial corner cut, compared to f/6.3 on the long end.


----------



## docsmith (Jun 17, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > I never bothered with the EF-M 18-55
> ...



I have both the 18-55 and 22 f/2. I prefer the 18-55. It is a very nice lens. Images are comparable to what I used to get with the EFS 15-85 on my 7D. 

Regarding the f/6.3, isn't the f stop somewhat moot with contrast detect AF? Of course more light is likely better, but I thought that was more of an issue with phase detect. Canon has had P&S cameras for years with >f/5.6 and contrast detect AF. How is this any different?


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 17, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > noncho said:
> ...



size yes. cost? do you think an element that is 35mm versus one at 31mm is going to significant change the price? 

all things being equal - tooling, zoom mechanism, making it this small, STM motor, IS, and the other 14 elements that are less aperture sensitive are going to more cost related.

17 elements in 11 groups - is quite sophisticated for it's intended market / price class.

the EF-S 55-250 STM has 15 elements in 12 groups
and as another example, the Sony E 55-210 is 13 elements 9 groups.

the sony rolls in at 63.8 x108mm as far as size for the same aperture range.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 17, 2014)

rrcphoto said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > rrcphoto said:
> ...



Sorry, not being clear. Lower _production_ cost. That means more profit. Keep in mind that Canon 'updated' the EF-S 18-55 (pre-STM) with purely cosmetic changes that fractionally reduced production costs. 

But...to the extent that a smaller front element allows a reduced diameter of the lens barrel, yes, even a '4mm' reduction matters. Materials are 3-dimensional, so a small linear change has a larger impact than you might think. 

Regardless, I think the main reason for the f/6.3 is a size reduction.


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

docsmith said:


> Regarding the f/6.3, isn't the f stop somewhat moot with contrast detect AF? Of course more light is likely better, but I thought that was more of an issue with phase detect. Canon has had P&S cameras for years with >f/5.6 and contrast detect AF. How is this any different?



EOS-M has hybrid Af ... phase detect on sensor + contrast-detect. Less light will certainly not help AF, although the issue might not be as bad as on DSLR/phase AF-only system.

Plus f/6.3 on a 200mm lens (equivalent FOV to 320mm lens on EOS M/APOS-C sensor) will require use of higher ISO setting quite often to get fast enough shutter speeds to freeze motion in anything other than fully sunlit scenes ... 

Yet another issue are diffraction losses. f/4 typically delivers maximum sharpness on APS-C sensors, from f/8 onward diffraction losses will set in. A f/6.3 APS-C lens does not leave room for stopping down.

See for example photozone-review of Canon EF-S 10-18/4.0-5.6 ... which shows diffraction losses already at f/8. 
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/874-canon_1018_4556is?start=1


> We've seen it already with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM ... Canon really knows how to design sharp lenses even at this price point. The MTF results are nothing short of astounding. However, first of all some comments regarding the "curves" below. *Some of you may be surprised that the lens is capable of providing its best results at max. aperture. This may sound strange but please keep in mind that APS-C lenses perform best around f/4 (full format: around f/5.6) and diffraction has already an impact when stopping down. Thus because the Canon lens is "so slow" to start with, it performs already best between f/4.5 and f/5.6.
> *The center quality is generally excellent till f/8 and the borders as well as the corners are very good. At f/11 diffraction has a significant impact already. Usually we don't include the reading for f/16 but we've shown it here just to illustrate that this setting should be avoided on APS-C cameras. The reduced quality has nothing to do with the lens, this is just physics in action.


----------



## Zv (Jun 17, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > I never bothered with the EF-M 18-55
> ...



I did consider buying the EF-M 18-55 but I have the 24-105L that covers the general purpose and walkaround needs while on vacation and I didn't want to buy another kit lens ever again. Saying that I'm still eyeing second hand deals for a cheap one! 

The thing I like about the 22/2 is that the combo is actually pocketable in a slightly "are you happy to see me or ... ?" kind of way! I use the M in conjunction with my 5D2 & 135L (a great combo btw you should try it!) and either have it hanging from my wrist or in the pocket for quick access for up close or wide shots during events and things. 

What's got me interested about this telephoto is the opportunity to have the M as my main camera for events with the 22/2 in a pocket for quick swap-out if needed. By events I mean festivals and things nothing serious!


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 17, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Regardless, I think the main reason for the f/6.3 is a size reduction.



same. even if this factors in as a not cheap item to get all the way over to NA, I'll probably get one just because it's far more smaller than the EF-S + adapter.

Just an interesting comparison (granted the fuji is faster - but you don't have any other options).

Between the APS-C short registration systems, the telephoto kit len's:

Fuji 2.95 x 4.65" 20.46 oz f/3.5-4.8 
Sony 2.5 x 4.25 12.1 oz f/4.5-6.3
Canon M 2.4" x 3.38 9.17 oz f/4.5-6.3


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 17, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> EOS-M has hybrid Af ... phase detect on sensor + contrast-detect. Less light will certainly not help AF, although the issue might not be as bad as on DSLR/phase AF-only system.
> 
> Plus f/6.3 on a 200mm lens (equivalent FOV to 320mm lens on EOS M/APOS-C sensor) will require use of higher ISO setting quite often to get fast enough shutter speeds to freeze motion in anything other than fully sunlit scenes ...
> 
> Yet another issue are diffraction losses. f/4 typically delivers maximum sharpness on APS-C sensors, from f/8 onward diffraction losses will set in. A f/6.3 APS-C lens does not leave room for stopping down.



you're not going to see a significant difference between 5.6 and 6.3 for any of your issues though.


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

rrcphoto said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Regardless, I think the main reason for the f/6.3 is a size reduction.
> ...



I do expect the Canon EF-M 55-200 to be a better perfermer in terms of IQ than both the much more expensive Fuji [which is not great] and the Sony lens. But lets wait and see .. MTF charts anyone? ... and then test results and pictures. 

Of course this lens only was announced, because I recently purchased the EF-S 55-250 for use as light telezoom on both my 7D and via adapter on the M. ;D


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

rrcphoto said:


> you're not going to see a significant difference between 5.6 and 6.3 for any of your issues though.



yeah, but 
1. every bit worse hurts ... anything from f/5.6 onward is twilight zone anyways ;-)
2. especially considering how ALL manufacturers LIE about focal lengths and f-stops ... in reality f/5.6 often really means T/6.2 and f/6.3 means T/7.9 ... or so :


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 17, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > you're not going to see a significant difference between 5.6 and 6.3 for any of your issues though.
> ...



Not necessarily. What is the T-stop of of the 35 f/2 IS? T/2. What is the T-stop of the 24-70 f/2.8 II? T/3. Modern coatings are much better than they were a decade ago. It's time for you to sell the 55-250 and buy the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II because that is what you really want. :


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

Random Orbits said:


> Not necessarily. What is the T-stop of of the 35 f/2 IS? T/2. What is the T-stop of the 24-70 f/2.8 II? T/3. Modern coatings are much better than they were a decade ago. It's time for you to sell the 55-250 and buy the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II because that is what you really want. :



For less expensive, darkish consumer zoom lenses, manufacturers tend to LIE MORE regarding focal lengths and f-stop. ;-)

and btw ... i got both, EF-S 55-250 and EF 70-200/2.8 II ... and use each for its own. I do have pictures, where I could not tell from just looking at them, with which one they were made. ;-)


----------



## mb66energy (Jun 17, 2014)

[...]


I do expect the Canon EF-M 55-200 to be a better perfermer in terms of IQ than both the much more expensive Fuji [which is not great] and the Sony lens. But lets wait and see .. MTF charts anyone? ... and then test results and pictures. 

Of course this lens only was announced, because I recently purchased the EF-S 55-250 for use as light telezoom on both my 7D and via adapter on the M. ;D
[/quote]


RED:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/ef-m/ef-m55-200-f45-63-is-stm/spec.html

BLUE:
I know that feeling but it doesn't work always: After I bought my 5.6 400 I was shure an IS version or the 100-400 unicorn lens as mark II would be available instantanously - 3 years later both aren't available.
But that feeling is a good anti dote against GAS ...


----------



## dcm (Jun 17, 2014)

Don't think I'll rush out to get it since I already have the EF-S 55-250 IS STM and I would have to import it. Not against importing - I already imported the 11-22 and am quite happy with it. While I appreciate the size/weight improvement, the MTF appears to be similar - maybe a bit better on the short end and a bit worse on the long end. Just might wait for other M related announcements to make a decision.


----------



## 1Zach1 (Jun 17, 2014)

It kind of feels like Canon is giving up on the US market for the M-line. Hope that isn't the case.


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 17, 2014)

Thanks for the MTF charts!

Since i do have the ef-s 55-250 + adapter i will also hold back buying more ef-m lenses until canon either announces a golden unicorn eos-m3  or at least a vlear roadmap showing, where they want to take the M system to. 
If a really good M3 comes along, i will shed all EF-S lenses and pick up Ef-M instead. Actially i might pull the trigger on the 11-22 even before ... If i get a teally good deal. 55-200 is somewhat less enticing to me due to f/6.3.


----------



## dufflover (Jun 17, 2014)

Yeah cost will be the other one. I already have the adapter and have seen the 55-250 STM for some decent prices lately. Cheaper than this forecast price and if it isn't pocketable (in otherwords anything except the 22mm pancake) then it goes in a bag where even my smallest config would have no real difference carrying this or the EF-S via adapter.

That is noticeably smaller though so can imagine a few people being pretty happy with that.


----------



## Act444 (Jun 18, 2014)

Looks like Canada will get it too so for those in the US that want this lens but don't want to pay crazy Euro/Asian prices, Canadian retailers should stock it for around $420:

http://www.canon.ca/inetCA/newsroom?m=getPress&pid=2167


----------



## dcm (Jun 18, 2014)

dufflover said:


> Yeah cost will be the other one. I already have the adapter and have seen the 55-250 STM for some decent prices lately. Cheaper than this forecast price and if it isn't pocketable (in otherwords anything except the 22mm pancake) then it goes in a bag where even my smallest config would have no real difference carrying this or the EF-S via adapter.
> 
> That is noticeably smaller though so can imagine a few people being pretty happy with that.



I was already impressed with the weight of the EFS 55-250 IS STM compared to my 70-200 f/4 L IS. Even with the adapter the M/adapter/EFS 55-250 STM compares favorably to my 6D/70-200 f/4 L IS combo when hiking. Cutting the weight by half and size by a third may convince me to go for the EFM 55-200, probably after a future long hike. Its about 50% longer and slightly heavier than the other M zooms. This plus the 11-22 are likely all I would carry in most hiking situations.


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 18, 2014)

Wow, now its clear: global launch of a new Canon lens ... Japan, all of Asia, all of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, all of North America ... minus the US. 

All of you "not more than 299 dollars for the full EOS-M kit Yanks" must really have caused some hard feelings in Tokyo. They won't give you new EF-M toys any more. No, no, no ... You've been bad and Canon will punish you. Fat mirrorslappers is all you'll be served for dinner from now on.

Hehehe!


PS: how stupid and shortsighted a "strategy" ...


----------



## dcm (Jun 18, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Wow, now its clear: global launch of a new Canon lens ... Japan, all of Asia, all of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, all of North America ... minus the US.
> 
> All of you "not more than 299 dollars for the full EOS-M kit Yanks" must really have caused some hard feelings in Tokyo. They won't give you new EF-M toys any more. No, no, no ... You've been bad and Canon will punish you. Fat mirrorslappers is all you'll be served for dinner from now on.
> 
> ...



Working in a large multinational corporation myself, there is a another possibility. Product quotas are a constant negotiation, particularly with new products. After initial failures due to high price, lack of features, limited lens selection, etc. in the US, Canon USA decided not to accept a quota from corporate for the M products until there is a more competitive product offering so they can be successful selling it. This may be a more likely scenario than Canon HQ withholding it from the US market. Other regions/countries may not have the clout with corporate to do this or find that they have a sufficient market to meet their quotas.


----------



## Arctic Photo (Jun 18, 2014)

I am very happy with this announcement. I have planned for some time to get the M with the 22mm, now this will make the whole package even more attractive as a second camera for travel and also the weekend family outings. They wouldn't launch this lens if they weren't committed to this platform, it's just that they are doing it in their own pace. Well done Canon.


----------



## Jamesy (Jun 18, 2014)

dcm said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, now its clear: global launch of a new Canon lens ... Japan, all of Asia, all of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, all of North America ... minus the US.
> ...


Any insight if it would be Canon HQ withholding from the US market or would it be the other way around with Canon US deciding not to carry a particular lineup? I have the 18-55 with a 22/F2 on the way from eBay. I live in Canada and could pick up a 11-22 for cheap at the local bricks and mortar but have been waiting to see the long term strategy for the M line. The release of the 55-200 leaves me very hopeful that the M series has some legs. After having used the M in a couple of its intended uses - I really like it and I anxiously await the M3...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 18, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> Wow, now its clear: global launch of a new Canon lens ... Japan, all of Asia, all of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, all of North America ... minus the US.
> 
> All of you "not more than 299 dollars for the full EOS-M kit Yanks" must really have caused some hard feelings in Tokyo. They won't give you new EF-M toys any more. No, no, no ... You've been bad and Canon will punish you. Fat mirrorslappers is all you'll be served for dinner from now on.
> 
> ...



Nice to see your comprehension of business practices remains as obtuse as ever.


----------



## mackguyver (Jun 18, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, now its clear: global launch of a new Canon lens ... Japan, all of Asia, all of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, all of North America ... minus the US.
> ...


Uh oh, you said "obtuse" - please tell your newly educated friends to watch out for the Warden and his henchmen...at least at Shawshank Prison...


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 18, 2014)

"Global launch" of a product ... except U.S. ... does not happen very often ... a bit like "semi pregnant"


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 18, 2014)

Jamesy said:


> Any insight if it would be Canon HQ withholding from the US market or would it be the other way around with Canon US deciding not to carry a particular lineup? I have the 18-55 with a 22/F2 on the way from eBay. I live in Canada and could pick up a 11-22 for cheap at the local bricks and mortar but have been waiting to see the long term strategy for the M line. The release of the 55-200 leaves me very hopeful that the M series has some legs. After having used the M in a couple of its intended uses - I really like it and I anxiously await the M3...



there was an interview with the Canon CEO that basically said it's up to the regions on what they carry.

let's face it.. only 100,000 MILC's were shipped to USA so far this year. that's with all the sony, fuji,etc new products released over the last 6 months or so.

there just isn't a market or a demand for them in the states.

and if you ever check the MSRP in yen and do the conversion to USD - you'll see that canon (HQ or USA) eats alot of money on exchange - so combine the two doesn't sound that favorable to launch an entire line including support, warranty service and training, and distribution to only take a loss on it.


----------



## Act444 (Jun 19, 2014)

Sounds cool but as I already have the 55-250 STM for the SL1, there's little to gain for me here. OTOH, a compact super zoom like an 18-200 would be nice.


----------



## fsgray (Jun 19, 2014)

noncho said:


> Where are 135 2.8 and 85 2.0 and 50 1.4 for M? Come on Canon, we need some nice primes!


Yup


----------



## dcm (Jun 20, 2014)

fsgray said:


> noncho said:
> 
> 
> > Where are 135 2.8 and 85 2.0 and 50 1.4 for M? Come on Canon, we need some nice primes!
> ...



I don't see a lot of EFS primes so I'm not really surprised by the lack of EFM primes.


----------



## Zv (Jun 20, 2014)

dcm said:


> fsgray said:
> 
> 
> > noncho said:
> ...



EFS primes don't make much sense to me (except a dedicated macro which they already made) but EFM primes would be small and that is a pretty clear advantage for the M system. Just look at the 22mm f/2, it's tiny. A 35 or 55 prime could be enticing if they were fast primes like 1.8 or even 1.4 (though I doubt it would be 1.4). I think a prime in the portrait range would be ideal to compliment the 35mm fov from the 22/2. 

FWIW the FD 50/1.4 works really nicely on the M via adaptor. It's a nice focal length but the lack of AF can make it a tricky lens to use when taking pics of moving subjects. That's why I want to see a 50ish prime for M with AF.


----------



## Jamesy (Jun 22, 2014)

Zv said:


> dcm said:
> 
> 
> > fsgray said:
> ...


I just tried my Canon 50/1.4 with the EF-M and turned off the continuous AF feature as it was hunting around like crazy. The few test shots I did seemed to hold promise and it is indeed a nice portrait length.


----------

