Five new EF-M lenses for the EOS M lineup coming? [CR1]

Does this mean an APS-C EOS R just got a lot less likely?

Well if that last lens comes to pass, then perhaps Canon will finally have kissed goodbye to that silly 61 millimeter outside diameter nonsense.

On the other hand at 300 mm it's f/8 which means the actual front lens's theoretical lower size limit is a mere 37.5mm.

62mm Macro = 100mm equivalent, not bad

I could see myself buying several of those if IQ is superior to most of the current EFm lineup.

docsmith said:

I could see myself buying several of those if IQ is superior to most of the current EFm lineup.

Click to expand...

That 18-45 sounds promising

It's about time the eos m line got some love. Hope they don't take as long as the firmware up date for the M6 MKII that never came.

Oh please please let them put IS in that 15mm prime, would be pretty much my perfect video lens! It's what I've been hoping for for ages, but with no IS it's no good to me

100-300 F8? Ridiculous! Cmon, Canon! What's wrong having 5.6 at 300mm, it's not that big.

Arod820 said:

That 18-45 sounds promising

Click to expand...

Finally a real fast zoom for the eos-m

Spreading the love around

blackcoffee17 said:

100-300 F8? Ridiculous! Cmon, Canon! What's wrong having 5.6 at 300mm, it's not that big.

Click to expand...

It will be as big as the EF one so no real reason to develop it, just adapt the EF one.
EF-M is first of all a compact system

Hmmm, I was planning on buying the sigma 16mm, that Canon 15mm version needs to compare favourably to that for me to buy it. I already have the sigma 56mm, so I'll skip the Canon 52mm. The 62mm macro is an insta-buy, I'm not even going wait for reviews

IcyBergs said:

Does this mean an APS-C EOS R just got a lot less likely?

Click to expand...

Yes

Arod820 said:

That 18-45 sounds promising

Click to expand...

Agreed regarding the aperture and that it likely means higher quality. But the focal length range, basically a 29-72 mm FF equivalent. It is on my list that I will probably get to replace my current 18--55, but would have preferred something with more range than 18-45.

Honestly, Sigma, Tamron, Canon, etc...whoever makes a high quality standard zoom EFm lens first gets my money.

Arod820 said:

That 18-45 sounds promising

Click to expand...

An earlier report had it as an f/2-4. I would really like a 15-45, even if it is f/2.8-4. I really hope that Canon has gotten over the obsession with 60.9mm overall lens diameter. I have both the Sigma 16 f/1.4 and 30 f1.4 lenses. Both are over 60.9mm in diameter, with the 16 being well over. Both work well on my M5 with a 270EX flash but would probably block the internal flash of an M6-2 or M200, especially if their lens hoods are installed.

IcyBergs said:

Does this mean an APS-C EOS R just got a lot less likely?

Click to expand...

I think it got a lot less likely when the RP was released.

SteveC said:

Well if that last lens comes to pass, then perhaps Canon will finally have kissed goodbye to that silly 61 millimeter outside diameter nonsense.

On the other hand at 300 mm it's f/8 which means the actual front lens's theoretical lower size limit is a mere 37.5mm.

Click to expand...

Canon has had several lenses with upper limits of 300mm, f/5.6 and 58mm filters. They could have used 55mm filters, but that would have been pushing it.

I’d be all over that 62mm macro as an alternative to lugging my 5D IV in the field!

I like the prospects of an f/2 prime trinity that you can have for under $1000 USD.

15mm f/2
22mm f/2
52mm f/2