Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 Coming for Photokina [CR2/CR3]

[ahsanford]

...but EF-M will be around a lot longer than EF-S, right? At some point the Rebel mirrors will go away...

In that light, perhaps a 50 prime for EF-M isn't so crazy.

but... but... what EF-S 50mm?

Edit: oh, nvm. You mean, 50mm equivalent. I get it, now 8)

Yes, I agree. I think that EF-M is here to stay for a long time, and a 35mm crop (prime) makes a lot of sense. So does a EF-M 50mm / 1.4 or 1.8, too, IMO.

Forget specific focal lengths, I mean in general: EF-M has a brighter future than EF-S.

If mirrorless is indeed the future, it makes sense to slowly climb up the SLR pecking order and replace them with mirrorless versions, likely with an EF-M Rebel someday replacing the standard EF-S Rebel SLR.

So I see neat new crop lenses -- like this first non-pancake / non-macro prime -- possibly only going to EF-M before too long.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

I really doubt curved sensors are going to go here.

100% agree unless Canon has figured out how to (a) curve the sensor differently for different focal lengths and (b) reverse the curving effect so that EF-S / EF glass can still work with such a sensor.

The (a) limitation implies that if Canon is doing anything with a curved sensor, a fixed lens premium compact might be the better call. Imagine an RX1R II or Leica Q with an even shorter (physical length) lens. :

And not figuring out (b) is a death sentence as it eliminates Canon's #1 advantage in ILC market: all the lenses that came before.

- A

 

[neuroanatomist]

I really doubt curved sensors are going to go here.

100% agree unless Canon has figured out how to (a) curve the sensor differently for different focal lengths and (b) reverse the curving effect so that EF-S / EF glass can still work with such a sensor.

The (a) limitation implies that if Canon is doing anything with a curved sensor, a fixed lens premium compact might be the better call. Imagine an RX1R II or Leica Q with an even shorter (physical length) lens. :

And not figuring out (b) is a death sentence as it eliminates Canon's #1 advantage in ILC market: all the lenses that came before.

FWIW, Canon has patents covering both (a) and (b) – dynamically variable sensor curvature where 'flat' is one of the possibilities. But a patent isn't a product, and even if Canon has worked out all the details to produce curved-sensor ILCs, I don't think we'll be seeing them soon.

Agree that a fixed lens implementation is the likely first place we'll see this. Possibly a high-end model, but also possibly a superzoom model – consider a PowerShot with a 24-600mm equivalent zoom lens that's the size of a G9X-type camera.

 

[9VIII]

There's certainly plenty of room for reasonable doubt that Canon will make anything significant out of their next generation of camera tech, but look at the track record: Fluorite, Electronic AF, IS, Diffractive Optics, 35mm Digital Sensors, 35mm Digital Video, and more recently Dual Pixel AF...
Over the last decade has any other company actually done anything as significant as any of Canon's top achievements? Is Canon just "over the hill" and it's all a downward spiral from here?

I hate to draw comparisons between hobbies because the industries are so different, but look at Nintendo, the company that founded the modern videogame industry when they regained consumer interest after the "videogame crash" of 1983, and they invented most elements of the modern console controller, they invented intuitive controls in a 3D space (Mario 64), then they invented the motion controls that took the world by storm back in 2006, and now they have the fastest selling system in U.S. history (the Switch) because Google and Apple couldn't recognize good gaming if it hit them in the face.
This company has been proclaimed "dead" or "irrelevant" just as often as they've been proclaimed the greatest thing ever to happen to the industry.

Sound familiar?

My argument is relying on some gross generalizations about company culture and progress continuing over long stretches of time, but the two companies rely on similar principals, they're both "user experience" focused and they tend to look for completely new angles on the base concept of their product instead of trying to iterate to the maximum degree.

As far as I'm concerned it's an inevitability that Canon will continue to create new products that catch everyone by surprise and change the industry in unexpected ways.

 

[Talys]

So I see neat new crop lenses -- like this first non-pancake / non-macro prime -- possibly only going to EF-M before too long.

Yes, I certainly agree with that. In the last few years, I don't think there has been more than 1 interesting EFS lens a year that Canon's produced - the last ones I recall are the EFS35 macro and EFS 18-135 USM (Nano), quite far apart.

I think that Canon will slowly update its more popular EFS lenses to be aesthetically more pleasing, without changing the optical formula or optics -- like they did with EF 70-300. Maybe, they'll give more of them Nano USM instead of STM. That will give lip service to supporting EFS without real R&D dollars going into it.

At the end of the day, I think that it comes down to there not being a huge market for "buy EFS because it's smaller", since EFM is the way to go there.

 

[rrcphoto]

I really doubt curved sensors are going to go here.

100% agree unless Canon has figured out how to (a) curve the sensor differently for different focal lengths and (b) reverse the curving effect so that EF-S / EF glass can still work with such a sensor.

The (a) limitation implies that if Canon is doing anything with a curved sensor, a fixed lens premium compact might be the better call. Imagine an RX1R II or Leica Q with an even shorter (physical length) lens. :

And not figuring out (b) is a death sentence as it eliminates Canon's #1 advantage in ILC market: all the lenses that came before.

FWIW, Canon has patents covering both (a) and (b) – dynamically variable sensor curvature where 'flat' is one of the possibilities. But a patent isn't a product, and even if Canon has worked out all the details to produce curved-sensor ILCs, I don't think we'll be seeing them soon.

curved sensors would crimp their ability to do stacked sensors.

stacked sensors will be far far important to mirrorless overall than curved sensors given the fact that canon needs to catch up on so many mirrorless fronts and that road is paved via stacked sensors.

 

[ahsanford]

So I see neat new crop lenses -- like this first non-pancake / non-macro prime -- possibly only going to EF-M before too long.

Yes, I certainly agree with that. In the last few years, I don't think there has been more than 1 interesting EFS lens a year that Canon's produced - the last ones I recall are the EFS35 macro and EFS 18-135 USM (Nano), quite far apart.

The wild card is if Canon follows through on this new EF-M lens and makes an EF-S version. They did this with the pancake and wide illuminated macro (not exact like for likes, but very close), and they very well might do this again with this 32mm fast prime. We shall see.

- A

 

[mpphoto]

For comparison's sake, here are the Canon EF-M 22mm f/2, Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8 (E-mount), and Sigma 30mm DC DN Contemporary f/1.4 (E-mount). The two E-mount lenses have a 52mm filter size. The Sigma definitely sticks out when mounted on a Sony a6000, but the image quality is worth it. That's one of my favorite lenses for the Sony and I was wishing Sigma would make an EF-M version. Hopefully this Canon 32mm f/1.4 is real and performs as well as the Sigma.

 

[bf]

Re: Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 Announcement Coming for Photokina [CR2/CR3]

If it's f/1.4, I'm in. If it's f/1.8, that may not far enough off the 22/2.

Agreed! It's better be 1.4 with a reasonable price. Then, I'm in!

 

[ritholtz]

So I see neat new crop lenses -- like this first non-pancake / non-macro prime -- possibly only going to EF-M before too long.

Yes, I certainly agree with that. In the last few years, I don't think there has been more than 1 interesting EFS lens a year that Canon's produced - the last ones I recall are the EFS35 macro and EFS 18-135 USM (Nano), quite far apart.

The wild card is if Canon follows through on this new EF-M lens and makes an EF-S version. They did this with the pancake and wide illuminated macro (not exact like for likes, but very close), and they very well might do this again with this 32mm fast prime. We shall see.

- A

I am also hoping for EF-S version. They did release EF-S macro lens after few months of releasing EF-M macro lens.

 

[JoFT]

It is great to hear that Canon is adding prime lenses to the EF-M ecosystem. I do love my EOS M5. And I did a lot of photos with the 35mmL f1,4 MkII... Awesome combo in terms of IQ but it looks ridiculous.


Therefore I hope this lens comes pretty compact, lightweight and in f1.4...


I will get it... definitely...

 

[LSXPhotog]

Let's be honest, this lens needs to happen. We need to have a serious lens added to the lineup of the EOS-M system. This would be a really incredible lens to add to my travel kit. I hope we see it happen.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Hopefully it's built like the 22mm and not all plastic.

 

[beachcolonist]

Time proven focal lengths that satisfy for their field of view are 24, 35, 50, 85 .... What is the motivation to create un classic, questionable angles of view at for instance 32mm? It's absurd, and wrong.

People have not been staring through lenses for 100 years without coming to some aesthetic conclusions that stand the test of time. So along comes some pack of children at an engineering shop with probably no understanding of visual history of art decide to reinvent the wheel, just a little bit off of circular. Brilliant.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Time proven focal lengths that satisfy for their field of view are 24, 35, 50, 85 .... What is the motivation to create un classic, questionable angles of view at for instance 32mm? It's absurd, and wrong.

People have not been staring through lenses for 100 years without coming to some aesthetic conclusions that stand the test of time. So along comes some pack of children at an engineering shop with probably no understanding of visual history of art decide to reinvent the wheel, just a little bit off of circular. Brilliant.

People have not been doing math for centuries longer than photography has existed without being able to determine that 32 multiplied by 1.6 (the crop factor of the sensor for which this lens is designed) is 51.2, which is pretty darn close to the 50mm focal length you mention above.

So along comes someone on an Internet forum with probably no understanding of digital photography and math who decides to criticize what he doesn't understand. Brilliant.

 

[9VIII]

Time proven focal lengths that satisfy for their field of view are 24, 35, 50, 85 .... What is the motivation to create un classic, questionable angles of view at for instance 32mm? It's absurd, and wrong.

People have not been staring through lenses for 100 years without coming to some aesthetic conclusions that stand the test of time. So along comes some pack of children at an engineering shop with probably no understanding of visual history of art decide to reinvent the wheel, just a little bit off of circular. Brilliant.

“Aesthetic Conclusions”?
I’m betting he hates ice cream too.

 

[brad-man]

Time proven focal lengths that satisfy for their field of view are 24, 35, 50, 85 .... What is the motivation to create un classic, questionable angles of view at for instance 32mm? It's absurd, and wrong.

People have not been staring through lenses for 100 years without coming to some aesthetic conclusions that stand the test of time. So along comes some pack of children at an engineering shop with probably no understanding of visual history of art decide to reinvent the wheel, just a little bit off of circular. Brilliant.

Now that's just good comedy...

 

[9VIII]

I've also come to realize that the Zoom Lens is the ultimate injustice in this world.
Who'd have thought that everything wrong with society could be summed up so simply?

 

[mb66energy]

While this lens is a good companion for the M50 - no IS means no easy buy for me.
Now it depends on (1) overall IQ at f/1.4 and (2) size. If they manage to make it very small e.g. like EF-M 15-45 it would make the M50 (and all other EOS-M cameras) a nice low light compact camera.

Very interesting ... but no IS ... today we have vast amounts of options but that doesn't make it easier ... because a lot of options are not the one we/I need/want.

 

[jolyonralph]

Time proven focal lengths that satisfy for their field of view are 24, 35, 50, 85 .... What is the motivation to create un classic, questionable angles of view at for instance 32mm? It's absurd, and wrong.

Let's take a variety of photos at 'classic' angles such as 24mm and 35mm and 'questionable' angles such as 32mm and 29mm and get you to tell us which ones are classic and which ones are wrong.

Because clearly the wrong ones will stand out like a sore thumb.