Specs & Images of the EF-M 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM & EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II Leak Out

[ahsanford]

Fascinating.

I am not remotely the expert on this. Others will chime in with specifics.

But consider that with LiveView on a Canon SLR today, you can resolve AF with teleconverter + lens combinations at much narrower apertures (f/8, f/11 in some cases) than what you can do through the viewfinder on some bodies, presumably for the same reason -- if you are resolving the AF from the live sensor data, you are bypassing the traditional SLR focusing (#3 and #7 in the diagram here).

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Anyone noticing Canon is drastically changing their lens design aesthetic? Outer design that is.

Their new lenses are ''slick''. They have different ''colour''. The Zoom rings are ''metalic'', the texture is lowered, making it one slick piece design, much like Tamron newest lenses actually.

It's hard to explain look:

Yep. This is not new so much as an evolution over time. Canon does this periodically when they update their lenses. I would say the L / premium non-L / budget non-L updates are quite different stylistically. (I personally don't give a rat's a-- about how it looks provided it's not neon yellow or something.)

But the style can't limit the usage of the product. Canon is excellent at this while others have stumbled here. Sigma's Art primes were made to look pretty/premium/luxe from the outside with a glossy finish section of the barrel, which is nuts. Any outer surface of the lens that doesn't have controls/rings is something you might grip it with (when shooting, mounting/unmounting, etc.). Why they'd made a surface glossy and not textured for gripping is beyond me -- one might imagine sweat / moisture + a glossy finish lens would lead to sloppy handling and possibly a dropped lens during unmounting.

- A

 

[scrup]

Anyone know if the digital display will show the approximate distance to subject in focus?

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Anyone know if the digital display will show the approximate distance to subject in focus?

Yes, with 99 % certainty .

 

[bainsybike]

I wonder whether the 18-150 lens has a metal mount and barrel like the 3 original M lenses, or if it's all plastic like the later offerings.

 

[ahsanford]

Anyone noticing Canon is drastically changing their lens design aesthetic? Outer design that is.
...

The 24-70/f4L and 16-35/f4L also have this design aesthetic, so it's not that new now.

+1. On the L front, I see the 100L macro in 2009 (was it?) as the big 'style change' lens -- the move to very high quality engineering plastic, the textured surfaces, etc.

Since then, the stylistic changes in (non-white) L lenses has been pretty consistent other than perhaps a font change or other little detail. Off the top of my head, the 24-70 f/2.8L II, 24-70 f/4L IS, the 16-35 f/4L IS, 35L II, 11-24L, and the new 16-35 f/2.8L III share those basic stylistic elements. I can't speak for the recent white L lenses (200-400, 100-400 II) as I haven't studied them as closely.

Non-Ls are a different animal in that there are a host of price points that drive a different use-case and market appeal. After 2012, I thought all non-Ls would start to look like the excellent 24/28/35 non-L IS lenses, but we're getting a bit of a mixed bag with non-Ls as some are pancakes, some are budget APS-C kit, some are bone simple like the 50 f/1.8 STM, some are focus by wire, some are not, etc. --> and that leaves a small amount of 'style proliferation' in the portfolio.

- A

 

[d]

The M5 with the 18-150:

 

[Ozarker]

Re: Images of the EF-M 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM & EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II Leak Out

I'm just wondering why some people here think it should be stellar or even " the best telephoto ever made". Is there some new magic glass inside ? Most 70-300 4ish/5.6ish on the market fall into the "crappy zoom" category, with maybe the exception of the Canon 70-300mm 4.0-5.6 L IS, that is good to very good (for what it is). But very far from a true stellar lens like the 300 f2.8 L II. How come a plastic low end 70-300 could suddenly become the best 300 on the market ? That's a bit like comparing the Canon 50mm 1.8 to a Zeiss Otus.

I think the term "best" in this context means "best for me" and not "best for everyone". For some, pretty strong optics, cheap build, a good IS unit, low bag weight and a cheaper retail price is the golden ticket to photographic nirvana. For others (me included) we just go "mehh".

If I wanted a travel tele...I would choose a 100-400IIL or a 70-300L or even a 70-200 f4LIS and a 1.4x tele.
While the current 70-300mm IS lens is very good optically, it's not good enough with my opinion of sharpness. Although it's a lot better than most of the 70-300 "plastic fantastic" dross that is out there. None of them are as good as an L lens.

Not to mention the fact that a bag of L lenses are great for working out in the hotel while on the road. Same reason I bought so many flashes and batteries.

 

[George D.]

Are we to assume the lens LCD (focus) display gets its power from the camera? Should this feature pass to the EF line, notably the L, does it affect battery life. I guess particularly if you're track focusing display figures would be always on the move meaning constant power drain. CR can enlighten?

 

[Sdiver2489]

Are we to assume the lens LCD (focus) display gets its power from the camera? Should this feature pass to the EF line, notably the L, does it affect battery life. I guess particularly if you're track focusing display figures would be always on the move meaning constant power drain. CR can enlighten?

Yes the LCD would take extra power but to see an effect on battery life it would have to be significant compared to the rest of the power the camera uses. In this case, no it is not significant. Most of the power draw would be the sensor, processors, focusing motor and back LCD.

 

[George D.]

Sure, least effect but cumulative. +5-10% of usage, I don't know. Let's see if implemented in forthcoming EF lenses.

I assume this draws about same or more power like the LCD screen on top of the camera. It's like having 2 LCD screens working instead of one.

 

[Sdiver2489]

Sure, least effect but cumulative. +5-10% of usage, I don't know. Let's see if implemented in forthcoming EF lenses.

I assume this draws about same or more power like the LCD screen on top of the camera. It's like having 2 LCD screens working instead of one.

No, less than 5-10%

More like 1%...maybe.

 

[George D.]

Mind the M5 does not have an LCD screen on top of the camera, so less of a drain there.

 

[crashpc]

When I put battery in my camera, it shows some stats on the top display no matter if it is on, or off. This works for two or three weeks before the battery drains. So this little display really is nonissue.

 

[H. Jones]

When I put battery in my camera, it shows some stats on the top display no matter if it is on, or off. This works for two or three weeks before the battery drains. So this little display really is nonissue.

That's exactly what frustrates me when people say that this is just going to drain battery. Having the LCD on all day is probably going to use less power than the lens uses while focusing for a couple minutes.

I would be very happy if they introduce these LCDs with a light-up option though. It would be great for night photography to be able to manually set to infinity focus without looking in the dark, since the infrared hard stop goes slightly past infinity. Obviously that wouldn't be the use for a 300mm f/5.6 lens, but I'm hoping this style continues onto some wide-angle lenses.

 

[scrup]

Anyone know if the digital display will show the approximate distance to subject in focus?

Yes, with 99 % certainty .

Lets hope they add this to the exif data to be captured.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Are we to assume the lens LCD (focus) display gets its power from the camera? Should this feature pass to the EF line, notably the L, does it affect battery life. I guess particularly if you're track focusing display figures would be always on the move meaning constant power drain. CR can enlighten?

Yes the LCD would take extra power but to see an effect on battery life it would have to be significant compared to the rest of the power the camera uses. In this case, no it is not significant. Most of the power draw would be the sensor, processors, focusing motor and back LCD.

An AF motor or the IS unit will have a far more effect on the cameras battery than a small LCD screen.

 

[George D.]

Screen displays focus distance and 6-bar horizontal/vertical IS operation. Most likely this is movie mode necessity working all the time - more of a gimmick in stills. I'm not saying it's critical but instead of finding ways to reduce power (thus battery size) the trend goes opposite.

 

[d]

Screen displays focus distance and 6-bar horizontal/vertical IS operation. Most likely this is movie mode necessity working all the time - more of a gimmick in stills. I'm not saying it's critical but instead of finding ways to reduce power (thus battery size) the trend goes opposite.

If the minuscule power draw of an LCD is potentially going to bother you (keeping in mind the several years that Lorus digital watch you got for your ninth birthday ran off its tiny factory-fitted button battery before needing it replaced), Canon offer plenty of lenses without an inbuilt LCD.

 

[Bob Howland]

The diameter and length of the 18-150 lens are exactly the same as the diameter and length of the 55-200, down to the tenth of a millimeter? This strikes me as unlikely.