Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017 [CR3]

[Maximilian]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

If M stands for "Marco" "Macro" I suppose this looks like they are trying to port the success of the EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM into the EF-S world.

Although I like the thought of this lens in the EOS M world my conclusion here would be

THe M stands for meh

+1
For "standard" lenses I'd prefer a longer FL for macro and 35 mm are something so boring in EF-S as the 40/2.8 pancake already exists.

The only thing interesting could be if this was a macro with HIS as the EF-M Macro is and if it was really small.


I would have been more interested in a 18 to 15 mm EF-S pancake, if that optical formula was possible with IQ comparable to the other pancakes.

 

[picture-maker]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

There were no comments when I posted this earlier. May be no-one was interested, so here it is again.

EF-S lenses of 22mm, 31mm and 56mm. Would be approximately equivalent to 35mm, 50mm and 90mm EF lenses on a full frame camera.

Because of this. The latest rumours don’t seem to make much sense.

First of all we were told the new lens would be a wide angle EF-S prime lens. That means it would be less than 31mm.

There is a lot of misunderstanding about crop size lenses, and full frame lenses. So has someone misunderstood the message? Was 35mm equivalentt said? And f2.8?

Who wants to buy a 56mm f2.8 lens? If you were using full frame what use would that be?

The M mentioned could stand for EF-SM 22mm f2.0 STM. That makes far more sense. Canon have all main components already and they are used to build the EF-M 22mm f2.0 STM, and that would be what the M stands for. I read within the last two years there was a patent for an EF-S 22mm f2.0 STM registered.

That would be an inexpensive way to produce an excellent new lens, and surely the market for this lens would be far greater than the market for newly designed 56mm f2.8 macro lens.

The new lens must be in production by now if it's to be launched on 5 April so all the speculation makes no difference really. It will be what it will be.

 

[scyrene]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

So it should be 35mm 2.8 IS and "M"ysterious.

There are exactly zero nice (in IQ wide open) wide angle (22mm or less) reasonable fast (f/2 or f/1.8 ) AF primes optimized for APS-C (in weight, size and price).
But Canon releases instead a 35mm lens with some Mysterious specialty (even if there is a 35mm f/2 IS which is suitable enough for APS-C in IQ, aperture, size, price).
I cannot imagine that there would be a smaller market for the above mentioned wide angle lens(es) than for a 35mm f/2.8 IS regardless what stands M for.
So they keep "protecting" their full frame bodies and lenses against APS-C. Even if this strategy will force some users (like me, who never considered going FF because of size, weight and price) to leave Canon completely or stop buying anything new from Canon.

So what are the options for users like me (wanting nice not too big primes for APS-C) who do not want to go full frame?
Fuji? Sony? Olympus/Panasonic?
But, I like OVF... so no option? Just to stay with my old gear not investing to anything new?

Sorry, but this is where we get back to sales talk. Because you're inferring that they're releasing a product few people will buy, due to some diabolical plan to deny customers what they really want, or something. But if there's one thing Canon knows how to do, it's sell lots of cameras and lenses. So I suspect that whatever this lens is, it's aimed at a gap in the market that they have identified. I've seen so many Canon products released that have been met with muted reactions on here or even outright hostility, but have sold well from what we can tell, and earned grudging respect after a while.

 

[chrysoberyl]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

The reversible lens mount patent from a few months gives the most likely explanation.
It's a normal 35mm lens when used in the "normal" orientation.
Then you invert the lens, and it's a reverse mounted (EF-S) 35 mm lens that works for macro.
Was a very common method in old manual lens film days to get some macro with a 50mm lens by
screwing a mount adapter into the front filter thread and reverse mounting it.

35mm sounds like a good focal length to do this, and the adapter is right integrated into the lens, so
it's "M" Macro, and novel. Just needs the electronic contacts in the front that will be covered by some removable ring/hood-like thing. with 35mm, it should give 1:1 magnification, or even a bit more. Autofocus range in M mode will of course be limited.

Novel notion! If this is the case, and it's sharp, I'll buy it! An ideal backpacking lens for one who photo's wildflowers.

 

[grainier]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

I just don't get it. Nikon's been selling its DX 35/1.8 for almost 10 years now and Canon still seems to think that its customers don't need a bargain-priced 50mm equivalent for crop.

 

[Markintosh]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

Maybe M is for motorized? I remember Canon has PZ-E1 Power Zoom Adapter.

 

[jolyonralph]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

The clue from the past said it was a feature that's not yet been seen in an EF-S lens, hence we are assuming the feature HAS been seen before in previous EF (or EF-M?) lens.

So the LED light thing makes sense somewhat. As does a movie specific lens (EF Cine lenses). But not so much the reversible mount.

I think the M probably stands for Manfrotto, and it will be the world's first pancake-lens with a tripod mount.

 

[jolyonralph]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

Maybe M is for motorized? I remember Canon has PZ-E1 Power Zoom Adapter.

Not quite as much need for a power zoom on a prime lens

 

[Luds34]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

Hmmm, f/2.8 is disappointingly too slow IMO. One of the reasons to choose primes over zooms is often the faster aperture. Especially being a crop only lens, I can't imagine much glass or too large of a size to get f/2 or even faster.

As for "M" for macro. The EF-S prime lineup is lacking, why come out with another macro lens when the EF-S 60mm has that area covered and is quite excellent as well.

Until we know more, this one is a bit of a head scratcher.

 

[benkam]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

There is a lot of misunderstanding about crop size lenses, and full frame lenses. So has someone misunderstood the message? Was 35mm equivalentt said? And f2.8?

Who wants to buy a 56mm f2.8 lens? If you were using full frame what use would that be?

Let's stop obsessing over the small difference between 56mm and 50mm. And let’s not pretend like a 35mm prime on a crop body is unheard of. People have been using EF lenses like the 35 f2 IS (and non-IS before it) and even 35L, and the Sigma/Tamron FF 35s, on crop bodies.

An EF-S and stabilized 35 will be conceivably smaller than the faster, fatter 35 f2 IS or Sigma’s non-stabilized 30 1.4 for APS-C. If Canon price this reasonably and keep it small because it’s a stop slower, I appreciate having the choice of this lens with the specs the rumor currently suggests.

 

[vangelismm]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

There is a lot of misunderstanding about crop size lenses, and full frame lenses. So has someone misunderstood the message? Was 35mm equivalentt said? And f2.8?

Who wants to buy a 56mm f2.8 lens? If you were using full frame what use would that be?

Let's stop obsessing over the small difference between 56mm and 50mm. And let’s not pretend like a 35mm prime on a crop body is unheard of. People have been using EF lenses like the 35 f2 IS (and non-IS before it) and even 35L, and the Sigma/Tamron FF 35s, on crop bodies.

An EF-S and stabilized 35 will be conceivably smaller than the faster, fatter 35 f2 IS or Sigma’s non-stabilized 30 1.4 for APS-C. If Canon price this reasonably and keep it small because it’s a stop slower, I appreciate having the choice of this lens with the specs the rumor currently suggests.

Sigma 30mm 1.4, now you did the canon lens became even more boring.

 

[slclick]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

There is a lot of misunderstanding about crop size lenses, and full frame lenses. So has someone misunderstood the message? Was 35mm equivalentt said? And f2.8?

Who wants to buy a 56mm f2.8 lens? If you were using full frame what use would that be?

Let's stop obsessing over the small difference between 56mm and 50mm. And let’s not pretend like a 35mm prime on a crop body is unheard of. People have been using EF lenses like the 35 f2 IS (and non-IS before it) and even 35L, and the Sigma/Tamron FF 35s, on crop bodies.

An EF-S and stabilized 35 will be conceivably smaller than the faster, fatter 35 f2 IS or Sigma’s non-stabilized 30 1.4 for APS-C. If Canon price this reasonably and keep it small because it’s a stop slower, I appreciate having the choice of this lens with the specs the rumor currently suggests.

Sigma 30mm 1.4, now you did the canon lens became even more boring.

The sigma is a more reasonable focal length, this 56 equivalent still leaves me smh

 

[benkam]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

There is a lot of misunderstanding about crop size lenses, and full frame lenses. So has someone misunderstood the message? Was 35mm equivalentt said? And f2.8?

Who wants to buy a 56mm f2.8 lens? If you were using full frame what use would that be?

Let's stop obsessing over the small difference between 56mm and 50mm. And let’s not pretend like a 35mm prime on a crop body is unheard of. People have been using EF lenses like the 35 f2 IS (and non-IS before it) and even 35L, and the Sigma/Tamron FF 35s, on crop bodies.

An EF-S and stabilized 35 will be conceivably smaller than the faster, fatter 35 f2 IS or Sigma’s non-stabilized 30 1.4 for APS-C. If Canon price this reasonably and keep it small because it’s a stop slower, I appreciate having the choice of this lens with the specs the rumor currently suggests.

Sigma 30mm 1.4, now you did the canon lens became even more boring.

Why do lenses have to be the same? If people want the Sigma 30 1.4, then they can get it. But it's not stabilized.

This is like the choice between Canon's own 28mm f1.8 non-IS and their 28 2.8 IS, where they each swap either a wider max aperture or stabilization as they both keep to certain price and size points. One lens would be preferred by one type of user, the other by another.

 

[slclick]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

There is a lot of misunderstanding about crop size lenses, and full frame lenses. So has someone misunderstood the message? Was 35mm equivalentt said? And f2.8?

Who wants to buy a 56mm f2.8 lens? If you were using full frame what use would that be?

Let's stop obsessing over the small difference between 56mm and 50mm. And let’s not pretend like a 35mm prime on a crop body is unheard of. People have been using EF lenses like the 35 f2 IS (and non-IS before it) and even 35L, and the Sigma/Tamron FF 35s, on crop bodies.

An EF-S and stabilized 35 will be conceivably smaller than the faster, fatter 35 f2 IS or Sigma’s non-stabilized 30 1.4 for APS-C. If Canon price this reasonably and keep it small because it’s a stop slower, I appreciate having the choice of this lens with the specs the rumor currently suggests.

Sigma 30mm 1.4, now you did the canon lens became even more boring.

Why do lenses have to be the same? If people want the Sigma 30 1.4, then they can get it. But it's not stabilized.

This is like the choice between Canon's own 28mm f1.8 non-IS and their 28 2.8 IS, where they each swap either a wider max aperture or stabilization as they both keep to certain price and size points. One lens would be preferred by one type of user, the other by another.

And with the 28's, one is sharp and one is well...not sharp and full of CA.

 

[hne]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

There are exactly zero nice (in IQ wide open) wide angle (22mm or less) reasonable fast (f/2 or f/1.8 ) AF primes optimized for APS-C (in weight, size and price).
...
So what are the options for users like me (wanting nice not too big primes for APS-C) who do not want to go full frame?
Fuji? Sony? Olympus/Panasonic?
But, I like OVF... so no option? Just to stay with my old gear not investing to anything new?

Nikon DX AF-S 35mmm 1:1.8 G costs $200, is reasonably small, optimized for APS-C and works with cameras with OVF.

Unfortunately, it is not in the FL interval I was talking about (less than 22mm, i.e. ideally one 22mm, one 15mm and maybe one 10 or 12mm).
35mm can be easily covered on Canon, too.

Ah. Right. My bad. Yeah, then you're probably looking at either big/heavy/expensive lenses or Fuji/u43
I agree with you. Something similar to the 301g heavy Fuji XF 23/1.4 mechanical masterpiece would be nice to have on a Canon crop body.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

If M stands for "Marco"

Then the next lens will be designated P for "Polo"?

 

[SkynetTX]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

If M stands for "Marco"

Then the next lens will be designated P for "Polo"?

Why not? Bet let's go further! There could be an EF-S 60mm f/2.8F for Flowers, an EF-S 300mm f/2.8B for Beetles, an EF-S 18-55mm f/2.8-4S and an EF-S 10-18mm f/2.8S for landScapes, an EF-S ##mm f/1.4A for Astro photography and an EF-S 55-300mm f/4W for Wildlife.

 

[ExodistPhotography]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

Let's stop obsessing over the small difference between 56mm and 50mm. And let’s not pretend like a 35mm prime on a crop body is unheard of. People have been using EF lenses like the 35 f2 IS (and non-IS before it) and even 35L, and the Sigma/Tamron FF 35s, on crop bodies.

An EF-S and stabilized 35 will be conceivably smaller than the faster, fatter 35 f2 IS or Sigma’s non-stabilized 30 1.4 for APS-C. If Canon price this reasonably and keep it small because it’s a stop slower, I appreciate having the choice of this lens with the specs the rumor currently suggests.

I really do not understand why someone is getting so torn up over the focal length. Its one thing to prefer and another to have a meltdown about it. 30mm or 35mm Who care, take a half step backwards or forwards.. Fixed..

I use the 35mm f/2 on my 80D almost daily. Its a fantastic lens. But its still pricey, I think I paid around $600 USD for mine from Canon back last November. Its well worth it IMHO, but for APS-C shooters on a budget, its just out of their price range. So a cheaper and lighter f/2.8 using STM (also cheaper) and priced around $300 bucks would be a big deal to some. Add in Macro (or Meth, were not sure what M means yet) and it could be a good selling lens. I have many viewers of my channel that would love an affordable 35mm.

 

[Loswr]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

If M stands for "Marco"

Then the next lens will be designated P for "Polo"?

Why not? Bet let's go further! There could be an EF-S 60mm f/2.8F for Flowers, an EF-S 300mm f/2.8B for Beetles, an EF-S 18-55mm f/2.8-4S and an EF-S 10-18mm f/2.8S for landScapes, an EF-S ##mm f/1.4A for Astro photography and an EF-S 55-300mm f/4W for Wildlife.

Perhaps you missed my point. I suggest you jump into a swimming pool with some friends...

 

[slclick]

Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM Coming April 5, 2017

If M stands for "Marco"

Then the next lens will be designated P for "Polo"?

Why not? Bet let's go further! There could be an EF-S 60mm f/2.8F for Flowers, an EF-S 300mm f/2.8B for Beetles, an EF-S 18-55mm f/2.8-4S and an EF-S 10-18mm f/2.8S for landScapes, an EF-S ##mm f/1.4A for Astro photography and an EF-S 55-300mm f/4W for Wildlife.

Perhaps you missed my point. I suggest you jump into a swimming pool with some friends...

'H' for housing