Hi! I'm a new member, new EOS-M owner, and longtime Canon fan who just pounced on that deal for the EOS-M with EF-M 22mm lens for $249. I also picked up a Canon EF to EF-M adapter, to make sure the other 150 people who purchased the EOS-M in the past 24 hours don't buy up all the cheap ones
I'm (a struggling college grad who just entered) the film industry with no aspirations of becoming a professional DP. I'd like a couple fairly cheap lenses to shoot some decent-looking comedy sketches or the odd event without having to bug my DP friends for help. I plan to purchase a nice DSLR somewhere down the line and make the EOS-M my B-cam, but for now, I figure a $249 mirrorless camera is better than nothing/my phone camera. (And I am very excited to use this little guy for casual travel pics.)
Which lens would you recommend to supplement the kit 22mm? As mentioned, I have the adapter, so I can go EF-M or EF/EF-S - and I like how EF/EF-S will work on any DSLR I buy in the future. I haven't found too many comparisons between EF and EF-M lenses, so I'm curious as to how the EF-M 18-55mm stacks up against EF primes.
I'm primarily considering:
- Nifty fifty EF 50mm f/1.8 II - can't beat the price, and 50mm on a 1.6 crop seems like a good length for medium closeups
- EF 40mm f/2.8 STM - I like how it's light and has good AF, but I'm concerned about difficulty manually focusing and that 40mm may be awkward with the crop factor
- EF-M 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS STM - the flexibility of a zoom would be nice, though I've heard primes have better image quality
Not looking to spend more than $200 right now, though hopefully I'll be able to afford a nicer lens by Christmas.
tl;dr Which has better image quality at long focal lengths, the EF-M 18-55mm, the EF 50mm f/1.8, the EF 40mm f/2.8 pancake?