My price reduced EOS-M is coming tomorrow with the 18-55 IS lens. Would someone comment on image quality between the 22 and the lens I will be getting?
They're both good. I don't pixel peep. Got the 11-22 on the way.
The reason I didn't get the 18-55 is it's f/3.5-5.6. If it'd be f/2.8 throughout the focal range I'd definitely have gone with it, even if it was $50 or $100 more. f/2.0 on the 22mm is great, but I'd accept a bit higher cost and small increase in size for a good normal f/2.8 zoom.
Yeah, at 2.8 it would probably be more expensive than that and bigger?
I'm fine with the zoom, good walkabout lens. I also like the f/2 of the prime.
If it's $400-500, I'd be happy to spend that money. Granted, the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 is ~$1K, so it's unlikely I'd we'd get a 2.8 lens for any less than that from Canon.
If it's of any interest, my Sigma 18-50 f2.8 DC macro works just fine on my EOS M, via the adaptor, if you need that range and that aperture you could do a lot worse and spend a lot more, obviously it's a more bulky package, but then anything but a pancake becomes a different size propostion anyway.
Yea, it's the size & bulk thing. I know with a f/2.8 I'd have to deal with a somewhat larger lens anyway, but I was hoping with the M mount it could still be a bit smaller. That's kinda the point of getting an M, is the size.