April 17, 2014, 09:38:31 AM

Author Topic: The rumored tele lens for the M  (Read 5834 times)

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: The rumored tele lens for the M
« Reply #30 on: November 21, 2013, 10:48:08 AM »

Let's face it: Canon has fully botched the EOS-M in every possible way. Even if there were more EF-M lenses  NOBODY wants to buy yet another set of APS-C lenses for use on only one camera body, after having  purchased EF-S lenses and (possibly) EF lenses already.

Agree.

Canon should have:
  • designed the EF-M as FF-sensored camera-system with a new mount with well thought out diameter and flange distance.


Disagree.  The EF flange depth for FF is well established.  It couldn't possibly be anything else if you want to include EF users and make that a selling point.  Which I think Canon had to really.

  • offer a starting line-up of 2 models: EOS-M-"Pure"= Basic model, as small as possible, LCD only, as cheap as possible
  • and EOS-M-"Advanced", slightly larger, possibly somewhat more controls, full weathersealing, Mg-alloy body and hi-end "retina" EFV

Disagree. I think they got the model right. It's a great size.  Great feel. Simple enough for folk buying their first EOS camera, functional enough for experienced EOS users to have as their B or C camera.

They should have held off until dual pixel AF was ready, or even just FW2.0 performance was available from the outset.  Even with FW1, folk who knew how AF works could get good results, with FW2 anybody could.  The problem is that a large chunk of the Ms target market want a camera that works out the box.  The M didn't do that at first.


  • plus starting lineup of 3 native, FF pancake primes, sized like the EF 40/2.8 ... e.g. a 18mm/4.0 landscape,  40/2.8 normal view pancake and ultracompact 85/2.8 portrait lens. All with autuofocus capability only. No manula focus ring. To make 'em really small, fully weathersealed, optically as good as the EF 40/2.8 and as cheap as possible.
  • plus one kit-zoom ... similar to Sony ... 28-75/3.5-5.6 ... but foldable design to make it really compact, when not in use .. "parking position".


Not asking much.  Why not just have decent EF lenses that can be adapted?


  • EF-M adapter included in package


Absolutely agree.  I think there is mileage in a plastic EF-s only version too, at say £30, or in the box.


  • plus roadmap for new EF-M lenses to come ... see Sony! WA lenses first, because those will be smaller and lighter with reduced flange distance compared to EF lenses. No need to rush native tele lenses, since they will not be smaller. Size of front element is determined by focal length and largest f-stop.
 


Em, forgive me, but as the thread is about the lack of EF-m tele lenses, isn't this kind of what Canon have done?  Kit 18-55, 22mm pancake, and 11-22 UWA?  You are criticising canon for not doing something they have actually done.  Besides, didn't you say earlier...


Even if there were more EF-M lenses  NOBODY wants to buy yet another set of APS-C lenses for use on only one camera body, after having  purchased EF-S lenses and (possibly) EF lenses already.

Pick a tune and stick to it buddy.


So they goofed and are being punished by us, the customers, who will only buy their sorry EOS-M if it comes almost for free. Right on them! :-)

Yep, well the launch prices were ridiculous.  £800 here in the UK.
The paradox being that the folk who have bought the M's in a firesale, actually now decide they quite like them and that canon didn't have their head completely up their harris.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The rumored tele lens for the M
« Reply #30 on: November 21, 2013, 10:48:08 AM »

AvTvM

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 769
    • View Profile
Re: The rumored tele lens for the M
« Reply #31 on: November 21, 2013, 10:59:22 AM »
I would be willing to buy a 3 pack of small new-Canon-mount pancakes (18mm/40mm/85mm or so) ... but NOT for an APS-C sensor. Only for FF. :-)

New mount will come anyways with transition to MILCs. And it will be no disaster this time. FD to EF did not work, but this time due to reducted flange-distance, only a cheap little extension tube adaptor without optic elements is needed to keep any and all existing EF lenses 100% compatible and functional.

Actually, I would have liked to see a multi-function ring around the lens mount on a FF EOS-mirrorless. To be used as "aperture ring" or for any other user-assigned function. Just like on the Powershot S models. Would really make sense.

The basic mistake Canon made, was to put an APS-C sensor into the EOS-M, rather than a FF one. With fast one-sensor PD-AF of course. Base model could then have been priced at about 1500 and advanced model with EVF at about 2500.  Next model to follow a bit later would then have been a high resolution version ... 36 MP, priced at 3500. :-)

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: The rumored tele lens for the M
« Reply #32 on: November 21, 2013, 11:14:44 AM »
I would be willing to buy a 3 pack of small new-Canon-mount pancakes (18mm/40mm/85mm or so) ... but NOT for an APS-C sensor. Only for FF. :-)

Yes, I would buy that too, and being EF it is entirely non-exclusive / backwards compatable.  Pentax could give a few lessons here.

New mount will come anyways with transition to MILCs. And it will be no disaster this time. FD to EF did not work, but this time due to reducted flange-distance, only a cheap little extension tube adaptor without optic elements is needed to keep any and all existing EF lenses 100% compatible and functional.

The cheap little adaptor is the key.  In the box, or cheap aftermarket.  I really don't think FF is the way, the A7 for example isn't the most compact out there.  If the M is about compact, then let it be compact.  The M isn't (so far) about replacing a DSLR.  It's complimentary.  The M doesn't need to be a 1DX beater.


Actually, I would have liked to see a multi-function ring around the lens mount on a FF EOS-mirrorless. To be used as "aperture ring" or for any other user-assigned function. Just like on the Powershot S models. Would really make sense.

So on top of the full size EF mount you are now adding an extra ring?  This compact camera is getting bigger and bigger.

I like the idea though.  Kipon have built in manual iris rings for some of their EF adaptors, although I gather this is an extra iris in the convertor rather than controlling the lens iris, which has to screw with the performance..  but a nub of an idea none the less.


The basic mistake Canon made, was to put an APS-C sensor into the EOS-M, rather than a FF one. With fast one-sensor PD-AF of course.

The basic mistakes were price and AF performance.  Had these been right from the start nobody would be having this conversation.  The M would have been taken as what it was.  A competitor to existing NEX and PENS.  The obsession with FF gets ridiculous sometimes.


Base model could then have been priced at about 1500 and advanced model with EVF at about 2500.  Next model to follow a bit later would then have been a high resolution version ... 36 MP, priced at 3500. :-)

Now I know you are pulling my leg.  EOS M should have been on a par costwise and feature wise with the entry level EOS camera, say the SL1. 

That would have given folks sensible expectations, and the target users / market a choice.

I maintain that the M is an entry level camera, and has never been marketed as anything else.  Folk who want 135/leica/minature format, folk who want the best possible AF already have a choice.

No camera is all things to all people.

dufflover

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 77
  • OH YEAH!
    • View Profile
Re: The rumored tele lens for the M
« Reply #33 on: November 21, 2013, 07:56:57 PM »
And pretty sure sales would 1% of what they are if they went down that route. Good camera sure, but (going off the trend) probably still lagging the other mirrorless competitors (FF or otherwise) and ofcourse they'd never flog those for $300 or doubtful even $1000.
Hurry up Canon and do something with your sensors! :P

garyalan24@yahoo.com

  • Guest
Re: The rumored tele lens for the M
« Reply #34 on: December 02, 2013, 01:17:50 PM »
Whenever the new M is rumored also the new tele lens is rumored shortly after.

Especialy in this Forum I hear again and again that such a lens would make Little sense as by Definition such a lens Needs to be huge (compared to the camera) and that this misses the reason of existence for the M. Once that Argument is thrown into the Arena the usual comments either go towardes the 'I anyway just use the pancake'  or  'please give me another Xmm pancake'

Now to come to the Point:
Does Canon not have this DO technology? WHy should they not decide to make a lens with the 'beauty' of the 70-300 DO I mean fat and short? Maybe the guys here who can calculate the feasibility of an optical system better than me can tell me what is possible or impossible. A EFM 55-200 DO IS 3,5-5,6 only 1 centimeter longer but 2,5 cm wider  than the kit lens? DO would massaker the IQ but a System that would still fit in the pocket of a coat would be very sexy to me.
you can also use Magic Lantern with the crop mode turned on for HD videos. So a 200mm lens now becomes a 600mm with no quality loss in the images. It sis not a digital zoom, it is a crop mode on the sensor, thus the high quality. And no aliasing and moire when using crop mode since there is no line skipping.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The rumored tele lens for the M
« Reply #34 on: December 02, 2013, 01:17:50 PM »