# The Coming EF-M Prime to be 50mm Equivalent for APS-C EOS M [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 31, 2018)

```
We’re told that the EF-M prime coming later this year will be a “50mm equivalent” and “fast”. If we had to guess, it’s going to be en EF-M 35mm (56mm equivalent) f/1.4 or /1.8. We know for sure that it’s not a 30mm lens and that it’ll be faster than f/2. We don’t know if it’ll have IS at this time.</p>
<p>Until we know the speed for sure, we’ll keep this [CR2], but the lens is definitely coming. I expect the announcement for this lens to come before Photokina, which begins on September 25, 2018.</p>
<p>The only lenses coming ahead of CP+ will likely just be new kit lenses, so there’s nothing too exciting going on for February.</p>
<p>We’ll have more lens news about Photokina soon, and it’s going to be a pretty big deal.</p>
<p> </p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 31, 2018)

If it has IS and a short physical length, I'm in.


----------



## Yasko (Jan 31, 2018)

Friend go theM5 yesterday. Sweet camera. The EVF is really cool and focus via the touchscreen on the EVF is comfortable.
Fokus peaking not as accurate as I thought it would be.
With the 22 f2 a small and capable package indeed.

I would guess 35 f 1.8 IS or something.
35 is too close to 22, without IS the distinction isnt really there in my eyes. Although I would prefer the 35 over the 22... I guess its a question of taste.
35 goes better with general purpose in my eyes, especially when it comes to more portrait-style pictures.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 31, 2018)

Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
Canon: "Here's a sweet 35L II. It's dope."

Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
Canon: "Here's a sweet 85 f/1.4L IS. Shoot yetis in total darkness!"

Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
Canon: "Here's a sweet 50 prime... but it's T/S so it has no autofocus, is f/2.8, costs a mint and weighs more than a 24-70 f/.8L II. But I'm pretty sure this is what you've always wanted."

Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
Canon: "Here's a sweet 50 prime... equivalent on an EF-M. [snicker]"

The wait continues. Congrats for EF-M, though. I'm sure it will be a nice instrument.

- A


----------



## slclick (Jan 31, 2018)

I'm in


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 31, 2018)

Yasko said:


> 35 is too close to 22



That's like saying 50mm is too close to 35mm, so we don't need both. One is a normal lens, the other is a wide angle lens. That's why we have multiple 50mm choices (except the one ahsanford wants) and multiple 35mm choices in the EF lineup.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yasko said:
> 
> 
> > 35 is too close to 22
> ...



Agree -- I don't understand why this gets such static from the forum.

A basic set of (FF) primes for Canon would be 14 / 24 / 35 / 50 / 85 / 100 / 135 and so on. They don't have to be those FLs, but that's what many FF manufacturers sort of landed on over the years. 

In crop, that means we should expect something like 9 / 15 / 22 / 32 / 53 / 60 / 85.

I disregard the macro f/3.5 as a proper prime -- I'm sure it's lovely but it's a macro tool in a separate column on the legder to me. So that means Canon needs to get cranking on EF-M primes. This is the first non-macro prime we've seen in EF-M since... _the original 22mm pancake?_ Glad to see!

- A


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 31, 2018)

```
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Dear <a href="https://twitter.com/CanonUSA?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@CanonUSA</a> , can you please hook our pal up with a new EF 50mm f/1.4, he&#39;ll even take a new 50L with a floating element , ahsanford&#39;s nearly decade long struggle is real. I pledge to buy him a copy when you bring what he needs to market. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/poorguy?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#poorguy</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/GASisreal?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#GASisreal</a> <a href="https://t.co/m7dQGS49Tp">pic.twitter.com/m7dQGS49Tp</a></p>&mdash; Canon Rumors (@canonrumorsguy) <a href="https://twitter.com/canonrumorsguy/status/958797537397260288?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 31, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
```


----------



## Larsskv (Jan 31, 2018)

This will be the most exciting EF-M lens yet, the one I have been waiting for. If the lens is good I will definitely upgrade my M3 to the M5. I hope they keep it small and light, so my money is on f1.8 or f2. 

Ps. Love the tweet to Canon USA.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 31, 2018)

CR Guy for president. Much love.

- A


----------



## Yasko (Jan 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yasko said:
> 
> 
> > 35 is too close to 22
> ...



It's not like there is no justification. What I meant is that, regarding the current EF-M lineup in primes, I doubt it will be a sole 35 prime without IS because having a 22 and 35 prime without IS on an otherwise pretty empty market doesn't make so much sense _to me_.
Of course there still is an EF Adapter, but the M5 is most sexy with rather compact native lenses. Coming from a bigger 70D, that would be the reason why I would buy one. Not saying that I wouldn't like to put a big FF lens on it from time to time .


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 31, 2018)

Yasko said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Yasko said:
> ...



Got it, and I'd agree. 22/2 was a pancake design, kept as small as possible, no IS. 35mm EF-M likely not a pancake design (but still small), should have IS.


----------



## bholliman (Jan 31, 2018)

Awesome! I'll pre-order when/if this is announced!



ahsanford said:


> Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
> Canon: "Here's a sweet 50 prime... equivalent on an EF-M. [snicker]"
> 
> The wait continues. Congrats for EF-M, though. I'm sure it will be a nice instrument.



 Crazy but true, unfortunately


----------



## Ryananthony (Jan 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
> Canon: "Here's a sweet 35L II. It's dope."
> 
> Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
> ...



my goodness you're picky. Obviously Canon is trying. You should be more appreciative of their efforts. ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 31, 2018)

Ryananthony said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
> ...



The next announcement from Canon will probably be for a 50mm mirror lens........


----------



## brad-man (Jan 31, 2018)

Well, since Canon appears to be granting the first half of my wish:

"Since in my wildest dreams I would not have guessed that the _second_ M prime offered would be an f/3.5, I shall refrain from prognostication. I'll just hope for an EF-M 32 f/1.8 IS and a EF-M 15-45 f/4.0 IS."

perhaps I'll get the zoom I long for as well. (And yes, the 32 f/1.8 _will _have IS)

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34276.msg703165#msg703165


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 31, 2018)

Ryananthony said:


> my goodness you're picky. Obviously Canon is trying. You should be more appreciative of their efforts. ;D



Here's where I am:

https://youtu.be/0ucGYTWdimY?t=22s

In this analogy:


I am Yondu
Canon is Groot
CR Forum Gen Pop is Rocket

- A


----------



## Woody (Jan 31, 2018)

Dear Canon,

I really really hope to see an EF-M 30 or 35mm f/1.4 lens like this one here:







It's only 187g.

Please, pretty pretty please.

Cheerio


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 31, 2018)

Woody said:


> Dear Canon,
> 
> I really really hope to see an EF-M 30 or 35mm f/1.4 lens like this one here:
> 
> ...



That is a beautiful lens.


----------



## Tremotino (Jan 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
> Canon: "Here's a sweet 35L II. It's dope."
> 
> Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
> ...



I'm so sorry for you :-\ what's wrong with the 50mm 1:1.4 and 50mm 1:1.2 L canon lenses ?


----------



## midluk (Jan 31, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
> Canon: "Here's a sweet 35L II. It's dope."
> 
> Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
> ...



Next will likely be a EF 50mm f/1.4 IS nano USM with focus by wire.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 31, 2018)

Just to stir the pot: I wonder if there is an inverse relationship between the release of a fast, high quality prime EF-M lens and the release of a full-frame mirrorless. 

Has Canon looked at the market and decided (like Fuji) that APS-C is a better format for all those mirrorless buyers who want a small, light camera? At the same time, might they be saying that the future of APS-C is with mirrorless, not DSLRs? 

That's a lot to read into a single lens release, but we shall see.


----------



## bf (Jan 31, 2018)

I'm not super excited as I like to have a tele-prime for efm mount.
I may buy it if it's faster or at leastleast equal to f1.4 and in $300 neighborhood, which is very unlikely.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 31, 2018)

Woody said:


> Dear Canon,
> 
> I really really hope to see an EF-M 30 or 35mm f/1.4 lens like this one here:
> 
> ...



Careful what you wish for. That design seems to test like the EF 50 f/1.4 -- decent in the center, troublesome on the fringes and you really need to stop it down to make it shine.

I would prefer the performance of Canon's own 35 f/2 over that Fuji, IMHO. I (of all people) love the notion of small + fast glass, but sometimes physics poops on our dreams and we have to make compromises. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

Tremotino said:


> I'm so sorry for you :-\ what's wrong with the 50mm 1:1.4 and 50mm 1:1.2 L canon lenses ?



Oh, Padawan of CR, there's not enough time to answer your question. Forgive me.

Suffice it to say that I'd like an all-purpose sharp 50 prime with Canon first party USM AF and flat plane of focus. Such a lens does not exist.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

midluk said:


> Next will likely be a EF 50mm f/1.4 IS nano USM with focus by wire.



And I'd buy that! FBW is okay (ugh) if it's quicker than STM. 

- A


----------



## NorbR (Feb 1, 2018)

Good news 

Personally I hope they keep it small, so I'm hoping for f/1.8 rather than f/1.4. IS would be good of course, though to be honest I'll probably end up getting this lens even without IS (provided the price remains reasonable of course).


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

NorbR said:


> Good news
> 
> Personally I hope they keep it small, so I'm hoping for f/1.8 rather than f/1.4. IS would be good of course, though to be honest I'll probably end up getting this lens even without IS (provided the price remains reasonable of course).



I'll be candid -- unless it's a mint they ask for, everyone who owns an EOS M will likely buy this lens. Everyone has been asking for fast primes forever on that mount, and here comes one.

The question is whether they'll go fancy / go big with this lens. Might we see our first nano USM EF-M lens? Might we see a standard filter size? Might we get a metal barrel?

Trying to size up if this is a $399 offering or a $699 offering. Presume it's the former, but you never know.

- A


----------



## NorbR (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Trying to size up if this is a $399 offering or a $699 offering. Presume it's the former, but you never know.



I'd be shocked to see anything at $699 or anywhere near that, though I guess it's not impossible if Canon suddenly decided to go for a higher end, f/1.4 IS solidly built lens. But indeed, that's not what I expect. 

If anything, it may even be more likely to swing to the other end of the price range. A very cheap, plasticky, 35mm f/1.8 with no IS for $199. A plastic fantastic for the M lineup. That sounds like it would fit right in the current lineup. 

I'd prefer $399 with IS and a better build, personally, but I'm not holding my breath


----------



## vangelismm (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Tremotino said:
> 
> 
> > I'm so sorry for you :-\ what's wrong with the 50mm 1:1.4 and 50mm 1:1.2 L canon lenses ?
> ...



50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8: Silver Ring, IS, USM. To make company to my 24mm and 35mm.
And i could easily give money to a new 28mm faster then 2.8.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Might we get a metal barrel?



Have you not used or held a current EF-M lens?


----------



## brad-man (Feb 1, 2018)

My mind's eye pictures it looking much like the 11-22 without a zoom ring. The burning question is plastic or metal mount? Bring on the popcorn.


----------



## dcm (Feb 1, 2018)

brad-man said:


> My mind's eye pictures it looking much like the 11-22 without a zoom ring. The burning question is plastic or metal mount? Bring on the popcorn.



... or the telescoping front element. Plastic mount if it isn't a mini pickle jar which I don't expect.

28 IS macro is slightly shorter than the 11-22 and about twice the size of the 22, but appears to have the largest entrance pupil, around 25mm. Not much room to go larger given the mount and electronics. The other lenses seems to be about 20mm entrance pupil, including the Samyang 8mm FE. 

I mostly use the 22 in low light situations so another full stop would be great. And more appropriate for the type of low light photos I shoot. With a 25mm entrance pupil, a 33/1.4 is possible. It will be interesting to see the size/aperture/price tradeoff they choose to make.


----------



## Woody (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Careful what you wish for. That design seems to test like the EF 50 f/1.4 -- decent in the center, troublesome on the fringes and you really need to stop it down to make it shine.



It is interesting that Canon EF 50 f/1.2L (590g, US$1349) which costs a lot more than the f/1.4 version has worse off performance than the latter:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/472-canon_50_12_5d?start=1

The el cheapo EF 50 f/1.8 STM beats them both:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/905-canon_50_18stm?start=1

In comparison, Nikon AF-S 50 f/1.4 G lens weighs (280g, US$460) slightly less than the Canon equivalent (290g, US$349), but has superlative performance:
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/441-nikkor_afs_50_14_ff?start=1

Conclusion?

Sometimes, it's possible to design a light weight (and relatively cheap) lens that has great optical performance.


----------



## brad-man (Feb 1, 2018)

dcm said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > My mind's eye pictures it looking much like the 11-22 without a zoom ring. The burning question is plastic or metal mount? Bring on the popcorn.
> ...



"_*We know for sure*_ that it’s not a 30mm lens and _*that it’ll be faster than f/2*_." This insures that I will be picking up one of these. I hope & expect that it will have IS, but I want one either way. These poor little crop sensors need all the light they can get  It will be interesting to see whether it performs like a nifty fifty or a 35 IS. I'm hoping for the latter, but, again, I'll get one either way.


----------



## eosuser1234 (Feb 1, 2018)

I would not be suprised if this projects an image large enough so it could be used on a FF EF-M mount camera. That way you get a 50mm equivelent when used on APS-C, and the same lense can be the 35mm on Full Frame Ef-M mount. 
Kill two birds with one stone in terms of their lens line up.


----------



## woodman411 (Feb 1, 2018)

Woody said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Careful what you wish for. That design seems to test like the EF 50 f/1.4 -- decent in the center, troublesome on the fringes and you really need to stop it down to make it shine.
> ...



You picked the worst L lens to make your point  Even then, I would still pick the 50L for people, even if it doesn't have the sharpness. If you shoot people, I have not experienced one small prime that I liked, no matter what the internet specs and numbers say. For me it's all about rendering and micro-contrast and skin color and 3d effect, things that aren't technically measured but visibly seen and felt (for those that say there is no such thing as 3d effect, an extreme example of this can be seen in this comparison between an iPhone and a Canon M100: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1321817752/iphone-x-portrait-mode-versus-ilc-dslr-camera . The fact is, the smaller the lens, the flatter the image, at least for close 3d objects like people's heads.)

If you shoot landscapes, the online reviews are more relevant, since their technical testings are against flat surfaces and focus on resolution/sharpness/etc, things that are not as important for portraits.

Anyway, it seems high end primes are going the other direction, they're getting bigger and more expensive, like Sigma's ART line and Canon's 85 1.4 IS. I wouldn't mind a non-pancake design with IS and consequently larger size, I couldn't stand how people's faces rendered with the efm 22 pancake (yes, I know 22 is wide for portraits, and yes, I actually like taking portraits with 22 (35 equiv)).


----------



## HaroldC3 (Feb 1, 2018)

Meanwhile, Sony will have announced at least 2 more bodies before September. Wake me up when Canon actually releases an EF-M lens.


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Might we get a metal barrel?
> ...



Only the 22mm pancake with the original EOS M body years ago. Presumed all of these (other than the mount feature) were plastic -- not true?

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 1, 2018)

Woody said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Careful what you wish for. That design seems to test like the EF 50 f/1.4 -- decent in the center, troublesome on the fringes and you really need to stop it down to make it shine.
> ...


yes, but the 50F1.8 is famous for its inconsistent AF.....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



The main/outer barrels of the first three lenses – M18-55, M22/2 and M11-22 – are metal (anodized aluminum; the inner/extending barrels are plastic), and the mounts are metal, too. The four newer lenses all have plastic barrels and mounts. Given that, I'd expect this new lens to be plastic, as well.


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> ... the first non-macro prime we've seen in EF-M since... _the original 22mm pancake?_ Glad to see!


Yeah! 

Slowly - but only very, very slowly - the EOS M system becomes interesting to me.
Maybe, when we see another prime - say EF-M 50mm/f2.0 IS ... 
It'll come surely before another EF 50/whatever USM.
Don't you think so, ahsanford?


----------



## Ah-Keong (Feb 1, 2018)

Can I ask for a EF 50mm f/1,4L IS USM? and adapt it.


----------



## Talys (Feb 1, 2018)

Ah-Keong said:


> Can I ask for a EF 50mm f/1,4L IS USM? and adapt it.



You can certainly ask


----------



## olympus593 (Feb 1, 2018)

It's a known fact that full frame mirrorless doesn't result in real weight or size reduction. But with APS-C, it's a different game, as shown by Fuji. 
I believe that in a few years the majority of Canon cameras with APS-C sensors will mirrorless, and that in 5 years from now the only APS-C DSLR will be 7D3 or 7D4.



Don Haines said:


> yes, but the 50F1.8 is famous for its inconsistent AF.....



He mentioned 1.8 STM, the new one, not the 50 1.8 II _shifty-fifty_.


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 1, 2018)

not interested. 

short EF-M tele lens please ... anywhere from 75-85mm f/2.4 or 2.8 ... IS STM ... or no sale to me


----------



## bdbender4 (Feb 1, 2018)

I'll take it _WHATEVER_ it is! 35mm is fine, f/2 and up is fine, no IS is fine if it helps keep it small.

As I have posted here before, after a year of waiting for another EF-M prime besides the 22mm, I put my M5 back on the shelf and got out my Fuji X-T20. (I had invested in Fuji before Canon got serious about mirrorless with the M5.)

I like the M5 body, and the touchscreen, and Canon colors, much better than the Fuji body. The Canon 11-22mm is very sharp. But slow. Adapted EF lenses are very sharp, but just too big for the M5, got tired of doing that after a year.

I like shooting with primes. Gee, the Fuji has two 35mm primes to choose from, f/1.4 and f/2 (I have the f/2). Gee, for macro, instead of that weird EF-M 28mm f/3.5, Fuji has two macros in the 50/60mm range to choose from (I have the 50mm f/2.8 Zeiss Touit, bought used for half the new price.)

So I am not suffering, but really would like to go back to the M5.


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

bdbender4 said:


> So I am not suffering, but really would like to go back to the M5.



Sure, but you realize that Canon isn't Fuji and isn't going to offer a dozen compact primes for an APS-C segment, right?

If you want small _and_ comprehensive, it's m43 or Fuji X.

If you want small and the ability to seamlessly use EF (but be underweight native-glass-wise), it's EOS M.

EOS M will never be Fuji X for a host of reasons, the principal one being Fuji has no FF line and needs to make X look as sexy possible. Canon has quite the opposite thing going on, of course.

- A


----------



## windsorc (Feb 1, 2018)

The second prime lens in 2 1/2 years for the EF-M mount. It doesn't look like Canon have any intention of creating a set of prime lenses for the M series cameras, at least, not anytime soon.


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

windsorc said:


> The second prime lens in 2 1/2 years for the EF-M mount. It doesn't look like Canon have any intention of creating a set of prime lenses for the M series cameras, at least, not anytime soon.



Their steady sales growth with EOS M (now #2 globally in mirrorless, correct?) would imply that simply offering the standard 'starter' slate of lenses...


UWA zoom
Standard zoom(s)
Tele zoom
Tiny prime
Macro

...got them this far. The $64,000 question is whether EOS M's sales are due to its appeal as a standalone platform or as a second camera for EF/EF-S users.

If it's the former, more lenses should be on offer. Perhaps not a full slate of primes -- EF-S certainly never got that -- but perhaps an 85 or 135 prime equivalent would be a logical next step.

But if it's the latter, Canon may just offer the lenses that keep the system small and simple and this 50 may be the last quick prime we see. 

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Their steady sales growth with EOS M (now #2 globally in mirrorless, correct?) would imply that simply offering the standard 'starter' slate of lenses...
> 
> 
> UWA zoom
> ...



And


Superzoom

(The EF-M 18-150mm that was in one kit flavor with the M5/M6.)


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> And
> 
> 
> Superzoom
> ...



Doh! I always forget one. 

Thx

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

Any thought on this new one being Nano USM instead of STM?

- A


----------



## Talys (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Any thought on this new one being Nano USM instead of STM?
> 
> - A



Sure, the super-quiet, super fast focusing I'm sure would be very much appreciated.

Not that it matters since this is going to be EFM, but the nano EF lenses are also much prettier (than STMs)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Any thought on this new one being Nano USM instead of STM?


----------



## BillB (Feb 1, 2018)

windsorc said:


> The second prime lens in 2 1/2 years for the EF-M mount. It doesn't look like Canon have any intention of creating a set of prime lenses for the M series cameras, at least, not anytime soon.



It is certainly true that the initial emphasis in the M line has been on developing a suite of inexpensive (and slow) zooms, but I don't know that it follows that this pattern will continue now that there a bunch of affordable zooms out there. A set of prime lenses might be unlikely, but some primes and some faster zooms don't seem out of the question to me.


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Any thought on this new one being Nano USM instead of STM?



No that's for my new 50, Neuro. 

Shake it again.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

BillB said:


> It is certainly true that the initial emphasis in the M line has been on developing a suite of inexpensive (and slow) zooms, but I don't know that it follows that this pattern will continue now that there a bunch of affordable zooms out there. A set of prime lenses might be unlikely, but some primes and some faster zooms don't seem out of the question to me.



It's very simple to me. If this brand...

...lives and dies by being smaller than its mirrored counterparts
...is simply a smaller way to shoot EF-S/EF glass for existing Canon users
...is aimed principally at travelers

then it stands to reason that Canon will keep things small and point people to the EF adaptor if they want more.

But if this brand is _principally new users for Canon has attracted since EOS M came out_, they might see a big ask from that camp to provide them with native mount glass. Such folks wouldn't own EF/EF-S glass, and they'd be looking at EF-M perhaps they way A7/A9 users were looking at FE for so long. 

- A


----------



## BillB (Feb 1, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > It is certainly true that the initial emphasis in the M line has been on developing a suite of inexpensive (and slow) zooms, but I don't know that it follows that this pattern will continue now that there a bunch of affordable zooms out there. A set of prime lenses might be unlikely, but some primes and some faster zooms don't seem out of the question to me.
> ...



And if it is a mix of both, or if Canon wants to broaden the M's base... ?


----------



## dak723 (Feb 1, 2018)

windsorc said:


> The second prime lens in 2 1/2 years for the EF-M mount. It doesn't look like Canon have any intention of creating a set of prime lenses for the M series cameras, at least, not anytime soon.



I think it is pretty simple. Will enough folks who own APS-C cameras - and especially the M5 - buy enough primes to make it worthwhile for Canon to make them? Since we haven't seen too much more than the standard zooms for EF-S, it seems that they already have that info - and the answer is no. I think there are a lot of folks like me - I haven't used a prime since my Olympus OM-1 was replaced by a Canon SLR in the mid 1990's. I have no interest whatsoever in getting a prime. The zoom lenses cover everything and do everything that I ever need. My guess is that the majority of folks who use crop cameras feel the same way (Canon rumors users are the exception). Their sales info and marketing research must tell them that primes are primarily for FF camera owners.


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

BillB said:


> And if it is a mix of both, or if Canon wants to broaden the M's base... ?



Look at EF-S for how that works out. They tried to 'get fancy' with it with $600-$1000 lenses, and they haven't tried that again in ages.

My guess is if the EF-M lens requested is going to cost more than X, Canon has some analysis that says that the market is too small to support that ask, the risk to keeping people in EF-M instead of moving up to FF increases, etc. and they'll just point us to the adaptor.

The question is, _what is X for EF-M?_ $500?

- A


----------



## Ditboy (Feb 1, 2018)

Keep in mind that the EOS M line is designed and built by the point-and-shoot G series group and not the DSLR side. That has been the problem all along. The two sides should compare notes, make a decent APS-C camera for serious shooters and use it to phase out the Rebel and SL line. Then come in with some nice M lenses to flush it out. I have four M5's and use them for 75% of my newspaper work. (I do have available DSLR's for the occasional sports) But basically the only Canon lens I use is the 22mm f2. I got tired of waiting for Canon and bought the Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 35mm f/0.95 Mark II. I also have several of the EF-M lenses by Rokinon/Samyang. I also have been buying Canon FD lenses to use. They are all manual focus which isn't for everyone, but with over 40 years in the business, been there done that. I would still love for Canon to make an EF-M 35 prime that is AT LEAST 1.8, but preferably 1.4, but since it is the G Series people, I'm guessing a 1.4 will be deemed "too big" and they'll go with 1.8. Let's hope it has IS too. But, I already have 13 prime lenses from 8mm to 400mm in addition the EF-M 10-22, 18-55, 18-150 & 55-200. So, I'm moving forward no matter what Canon does. And I have my eye on the just announced Venus Optics Laowa 9mm f/2.8 which will be available in EF-M...


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 1, 2018)

Ditboy said:


> The two sides should compare notes, make a decent APS-C camera for serious shooters and use it to phase out the Rebel and SL line.



Certain to happen, yes, but the question is when. Canon's very good at selling these Rebel SLRs and doesn't want to jeopardize that by going mirrorless in its bread and butter sales area too soon / too abruptly. It makes sense to sell a mirroless Rebel right alongside the regular Rebel for one generation as separate options, then, one generation later, only the mirrorless one is updated and the SLR at that price point becomes RIP. Canon then ratchets up one more price point higher in the line and does it again.

To simply convert the next Rebel to mirrorless with no mirrored version available is to sign up that market for EVF lag, less AF responsiveness, fast draining batteries, etc. and perhaps Canon has market research to suggest that if they did this, Nikon would scoop up their Rebel business with their equivalent SLRs.

- A


----------



## bf (Feb 2, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > And if it is a mix of both, or if Canon wants to broaden the M's base... ?
> ...


$399


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 2, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > And if it is a mix of both, or if Canon wants to broaden the M's base... ?
> ...



the 18-150 came out at 599, the most expensive M lens to date.

if there is a price point canon's designing to that, would eliminate alot of lenses.


----------



## slclick (Feb 2, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > BillB said:
> ...



I will gladly part with my 18-150 for another M Prime. In fact I'll sell it tonight if I could get 75% of what I paid for it.


----------



## Talys (Feb 2, 2018)

dak723 said:


> windsorc said:
> 
> 
> > The second prime lens in 2 1/2 years for the EF-M mount. It doesn't look like Canon have any intention of creating a set of prime lenses for the M series cameras, at least, not anytime soon.
> ...



Pretty much that. A know a fair number of people who are "lite hobbyists" -- they buy a MILC or a DSLR, but really just use kit zooms and are quite happy with that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that market, and I'm not trying to be derogatory or elitist, or anything like that -- but even if they get talked into buying an inexpensive prime, like a 50/1.8STM, _they never use it_.


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 2, 2018)

Talys said:


> Pretty much that. A know a fair number of people who are "lite hobbyists" -- they buy a MILC or a DSLR, but really just use kit zooms and are quite happy with that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that market, and I'm not trying to be derogatory or elitist, or anything like that -- but even if they get talked into buying an inexpensive prime, like a 50/1.8STM, _they never use it_.



exactly! Zooms rule supreme. Majority of "casual camera users" have a camera with a zoom mounted, because they hate being stuck with a fixed focal prime lens in their smartphones. 

I have EF and EF-M primes and zooms ... and today 80% of my images are captured using EOS M [original] plus EF-M 18-55 kit lens. It always comes down to do i want "flexibility in framing a shot and options for perspectives" or only 1 possible focal length or having to carry along more than 1 lens ... and IQ-wise even small, compact zooms are "more than good enough" ... not much of an IQ sacrifice "in real life" vs. primes. Only real difference is (typically) 2 stops slower speed and less potential for subject isolation if/when desired.


----------



## brad-man (Feb 3, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Pretty much that. A know a fair number of people who are "lite hobbyists" -- they buy a MILC or a DSLR, but really just use kit zooms and are quite happy with that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that market, and I'm not trying to be derogatory or elitist, or anything like that -- but even if they get talked into buying an inexpensive prime, like a 50/1.8STM, _they never use it_.
> ...



The fact that zooms are far more popular than primes is not a new revelation. The question is whether the market for faster primes for the M is large enough for Canon to be bothered to produce them. I would argue that a better lens selection for the M would lead to an even larger market share of camera sales for Canon by bringing in enthusiasts that want more than a hi-res point & shoot. Of course I have no data to back that up. I imagine that this upcoming prime's sales figures will be the "canary in the coal mine" for future M prime development. I can guarantee at least one sale


----------



## barryreid (Feb 5, 2018)

Given that there is a 22 a 22mm & a 28mm already isn't it somewhat ridiculous that the next prime available in EF-M could be a 32mm.

Surely a 50-60mm f/2 (IS, maybe) to pair up with the 22 f/2 would make for a more balanced approach.


----------



## BillB (Feb 5, 2018)

barryreid said:


> Given that there is a 22 a 22mm & a 28mm already isn't it somewhat ridiculous that the next prime available in EF-M could be a 32mm.
> 
> Surely a 50-60mm f/2 (IS, maybe) to pair up with the 22 f/2 would make for a more balanced approach.



I'm with you on that. A 50ish prime would also pair nicely with the 11-22 zoom. On the other hand, there is already the 50 f1.8, which can be adapted, and some people who post here feel quite strongly that the 28mm f3.5 doesn't meet the need for a fast normal prime. Then there are those who feel the need for lots of fast primes of unspecified focal length and resent Canon's failure to provide them.


----------



## Talys (Feb 5, 2018)

BillB said:


> barryreid said:
> 
> 
> > Given that there is a 22 a 22mm & a 28mm already isn't it somewhat ridiculous that the next prime available in EF-M could be a 32mm.
> ...



I think they're both pretty important. Obviously, 50mm equivalent is a key FL.

And, the 50-60 would be your 85mm equivalent, so that _is_ an important FL, with the benefit of the 50mm optical formula that's very space efficient (ie we can have a small, fast, EFM prime). Just look at the glass size of the first and last elements on a 50/1.8, and imagine that without all the plastic around it and a narrower barrel -- then reduce the diameter! 

I'm suppose the Canon approach is to start wide, and work towards tele, and my only guess is that Canon thinks that a big chunk of the EF-M crowd prefers zooms, so those primes are a lower priority.


----------



## BillB (Feb 5, 2018)

Talys said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > barryreid said:
> ...



It seems to me that for aps-c in general and EF-M in particular, the main Canon lens strategy has been to develop affordable (and slowish) zooms with very good IQ that are quite good for video (i.e. with STM). What I wonder is whether Canon thinks there is a need for more of these affordable EF-S and EF-M zooms, or whether they are thinking it is time for some more primes, even some pricier zooms. Of course, the answer could be none of the above and there aren't going be many more EF-S and EF-M lens designs coming out.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 5, 2018)

slclick said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



I wouldn't. Never. the 18-150 + DLO is a wickedly good combination.


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 5, 2018)

Talys said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > barryreid said:
> ...



the zooms are tiny, optically good, cheap - it's really hard to say no to that, and they are far more liberating than a few primes at some medium focal ranges.


----------



## dak723 (Feb 5, 2018)

Talys said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > windsorc said:
> ...



It is not just "lite hobbyists" who use zooms and have no interest in primes. I would consider myself a "serious 
hobbyist" who sells some of his photos. Since I shoot primarily landscapes, I have no need for fast lenses and it is far more important to get the composition right, so zooms are the way to go for me. And clearly, many others as well. I would be very surprised if Canon didn't have a lot of data on which market buys primes, and my guess it would be mostly FF users. If the data indicated that APS-C users would buy primes, I think we would have seen many more EF-S primes since that mount came out.


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 5, 2018)

dak723 said:


> It is not just "lite hobbyists" who use zooms and have no interest in primes. I would consider myself a "serious
> hobbyist" who sells some of his photos. Since I shoot primarily landscapes, I have no need for fast lenses and it is far more important to get the composition right, so zooms are the way to go for me. And clearly, many others as well. I would be very surprised if Canon didn't have a lot of data on which market buys primes, and my guess it would be mostly FF users. If the data indicated that APS-C users would buy primes, I think we would have seen many more EF-S primes since that mount came out.



Sure, but what confounds this is that there is a staggering spread of FF glass that also bolts on these EF-S bodies. So Canon has a very profitable reason _not_ to offer these in crop -- they could sell more EF lenses and possibly nick some folks to migrate up to FF.

In other words, primes might be a huge hit for EF-S and EF-M users and we'd never know -- because the primes they are using are EF.

So I recommend looking to Fuji for a moment for a slice of alternate reality on what Canon might have done. In the absence of an FF platform behind it, what did Fuji do? They went all-in on crop and put out a boatload of fast primes. EF-S/EF-M body owners would looooooove even a small slice of purpose-built-for-crop primes like that.

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Feb 5, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> So I recommend looking to Fuji for a moment for a slice of alternate reality on what Canon might have done. In the absence of an FF platform behind it, what did Fuji do? They went all-in on crop and put out a boatload of fast primes. EF-S/EF-M body owners would looooooove even a small slice of purpose-built-for-crop primes like that.



to be quite honest, maybe some EF-S/EF-M owners would love that.

Me? to be perfectly honest - outside of an estoric ultra fast ultra wide prime for astro-landscape, I have zero use for specific primes as most of my images with the M are landscape, travel, and if I want to throw out the background on an image, most times the .33x magnification on every EF-M lens will take care of the background nicely.

as it is with 4K there's a tiny vocal group that shouts from the rooftops about necessities, but the silent majority simply uses what they have - which is usually a zoom.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 5, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> ...what did Fuji do? They went all-in on crop and put out a boatload of fast primes. EF-S/EF-M body owners would looooooove even a small slice of purpose-built-for-crop primes like that.



What fraction of the overall EF-S/EF-M market do you believe would looooooove such lenses enough to actually buy them?


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 5, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > ...what did Fuji do? They went all-in on crop and put out a boatload of fast primes. EF-S/EF-M body owners would looooooove even a small slice of purpose-built-for-crop primes like that.
> ...



Goodness, I don't mean gen pop soccer moms and hockey dads, I mean 'we, the enthusiasts of the world'. No idea if it would make a return on the investment for Canon.

- A


----------



## BillB (Feb 5, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > ...what did Fuji do? They went all-in on crop and put out a boatload of fast primes. EF-S/EF-M body owners would looooooove even a small slice of purpose-built-for-crop primes like that.
> ...



Using B&H prices, my back of the envelope figuring shows that all the 14 listed Fuji primes cost $400 or more (all prices rounded to the nearest dollar), while only one of the 7 EF-M lenses available at the Canon Store costs more than $400. Half of the Fuji priimes cost $900 or more. Fuji is clearly trying to sell at a price point that Canon does not reach with any of its aps-c lenses.

The Canon Store lists 7 standard EF-S zooms priced between $500 and $880, along with the 10-22 for $600, so the highest priced Canon aps-c lenses are EF-S zooms. Even so, half of the Fuji primes cost more than any EF-S or EF-M lens. In fact, half the Fuji primes are at price points higher than most non-L Canon fullframe glass, prime or zoom.


----------



## brad-man (Feb 5, 2018)

No need to fight. Canon won't be releasing "top tiered pro level" M primes anytime soon. Some EF-Ms along the lines of the 24, 28 & 35 IS series would be more than sufficient.


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 5, 2018)

BillB said:


> Using B&H prices, my back of the envelope figuring shows that all the 14 listed Fuji primes cost $400 or more (all prices rounded to the nearest dollar), while only one of the 7 EF-M lenses available at the Canon Store costs more than $400. Half of the Fuji priimes cost $900 or more. Fuji is clearly trying to sell at a price point that Canon does not reach with any of its aps-c lenses.
> 
> The Canon Store lists 7 standard EF-S zooms priced between $500 and $880, along with the 10-22 for $600, so the highest priced Canon aps-c lenses are EF-S zooms. Even so, half of the Fuji primes cost more than any EF-S or EF-M lens. In fact, half the Fuji primes are at price points higher than most non-L Canon fullframe glass, prime or zoom.



Fuji's volumes are much lower, and in fairness to them, some of those lenses are more of an L spec than a non-L spec. But yes, it's somewhat of a boutique brand and it comes with prices to match. 

Again, I'm not saying (a) Fuji did it so Canon should or (b) Canon will make lots of money doing this. I'm just saying Fuji doing it is somewhat logical given that there isn't FF portfolio of glass sitting above the X mount in the lineup like it does for EF vs. EF-S / EF-M.

But I've heard the refrain often here: 'I want fast(er) primes for crop.' Fuji offers that. That's all.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 5, 2018)

brad-man said:


> No need to fight. Canon won't be releasing "top tiered pro level" M primes anytime soon. Some EF-Ms along the lines of the 24, 28 & 35 IS series would be more than sufficient.



If by 'along the lines' you don't mind focus by wire... We still haven't seen a Ring USM EF-M lens yet.

But sure, those three are great lenses.

- A


----------



## brad-man (Feb 5, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > No need to fight. Canon won't be releasing "top tiered pro level" M primes anytime soon. Some EF-Ms along the lines of the 24, 28 & 35 IS series would be more than sufficient.
> ...



Even after all of your exasperation over a certain focal length, you remain the eternal optimist


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 5, 2018)

brad-man said:


> Even after all of your exasperation over a certain focal length, you remain the eternal optimist



Ha, forever the realist -- that's me. 

I'm just saying:

Last EF 'non-premium' (non-L / non-DO) lens with Ring USM = 2012
Last EF-S lens with Ring USM = 2009
Last EF-M lens with Ring USM = still waiting; it's never happened

We can read this two ways:


Smooth AF for video that STM and Nano USM delivers is _really_ nice, or...


A feature that was standard on lenses _20+ years ago_ on affordable mid-grade non-L lenses (28 1.8, 85 1.8, etc.) is no longer available to us unless we want to pony up the bucks for L glass. Because profit margins.

Spoiler alert: I'm in the latter group. I have a hard time squaring up the demise of affordable ring USM / mechanically override-able lenses as anything other than a takeaway by Canon.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 5, 2018)

Or perhaps unpacking this a different way:

Early 90s:

Canon: "Ring USM is the jam, it's amazing."
Us: "Okay, can we have that in affordable non-L lenses?"
Canon: "Here ya go!"
Us: "Score."

2012 - Present:

Canon: "Check out this hot new STM stuff! Way better for video!"
Us: "Cool, but this is just an AF upgrade to the budget super-cheapo lenses, right?"
Canon: "No no, it's great for stills and video."
Us: "Oh, so it's an upgrade to Ring USM for stills people?"
Canon: "Sort of. Video AF is way better, but it's slower focusing and you can no longer mechanically override your AF."
Us: "Wow, that's pretty harsh actually. I think I'll wait for new Ring USM lenses."
Canon: "That's, um, going to be a while."
Us: "Whoa, you are taking Ring USM away?!" 
Canon: "Oh no no, new Ring USM will still be released. _In future L and DO lenses only._"
Us: "Wait, new mid-grade EF lenses won't have Ring USM anymore?"
Canon: "Trust me, you'll love STM. Meet your new 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM lens! Ain't she a beaut?"
Us: "Why? Didn't we use to have a mid-level 28-135 Ring USM lens?"
Canon: "Sure, but this STM one is way better!"
Us: "Really? If STM is so great, I presume future L lenses will come with STM now?"
Canon: "Don't be silly, _premium_ lenses get _premium_ AF tech - L lenses will continue to have Ring USM!"
Us: "Ah, so Ring USM, something you've been *somehow* able to deliver to us in a middle price point for 20 years is now only reserved for the best lenses that cost a great deal more? Why can't mid-level lenses have Ring USM anymore? Isn't this quite literally a takeaway for stills shooters?"
Canon: "No no -- STM is so awesome!"
. . .
Us: [Resigned to sadness] "So you are totally not making more lenses like the 24/28/35 IS primes, are you?"
Canon: [Acts like I did not ask that question and leaves the room]

Canon in 2016 - Present

[Repeat the 2012 - Present, but just replace STM with Nano USM.]

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 9, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> So I recommend looking to Fuji for a moment for a slice of alternate reality on what Canon might have done. In the absence of an FF platform behind it, what did Fuji do? They went all-in on crop and put out a boatload of fast primes. EF-S/EF-M body owners would looooooove even a small slice of purpose-built-for-crop primes like that.



yes, look at stupid Fuji. Their decisions to 
1. NOT offer FF mirrorless 
2. offer APS-C stuff priced pretty much like Canon FF gear
3. offer a wide range of more or less fast and exotic prime lenses which are all way too big and way too expensive ...
4. use all retro design on it with mono-functional control points instead of a compelling "digital" user interface 

are the very reasons WHY Fuji is and will forever be stuck at less than 3% market share. Good on them. Stupid Canon is extremely fortunate that their competition - namely Fuji - is acting even more stupidly.


----------



## BillB (Feb 9, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > So I recommend looking to Fuji for a moment for a slice of alternate reality on what Canon might have done. In the absence of an FF platform behind it, what did Fuji do? They went all-in on crop and put out a boatload of fast primes. EF-S/EF-M body owners would looooooove even a small slice of purpose-built-for-crop primes like that.
> ...



How do you end up with a little money selling a many different crop primes at boutique prices? Answer: It's easy if you start out with a lot of money.


----------

