Bottom Line: We need a nice EF-M portrait tele. Please optimize it Canon! Thanks!
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:All I want is a newly designed, kick-ass EF 50/1.4 II IS
What is the point in going mirrorless and keeping the EF mount? I get the lens compatibility, but by keeping the EF mount, you basically limit the size of the camera to, at best, be the size of the SL1. Can't really make it smaller than that, and if you want more processing power (many point AF, etc), it'd have to be bigger.tayassu said:I do still believe that Canon will go mirrorless with their 'normal' SLR's (I expect the 7DII to be the first one -> hybrid VF, stunning video functions, many autofocus points etc.) and they will have an EF mount, otherwise they would kill themselves after building up a lens system for, I don't know, 40 years?! I wouldn't bet on the M system.
This is an interesting concept, but, I have to imagine that technologically it'd be pretty complex. And, since those speedboosters all run in the $4-600 range, you're talking a big price addition to any body.ecka said:Canon may end up making a mirrorless body with built-in speedbooster.
1. They would keep the EF mount and all FF lens support
2. No need for FF sensor, lower price, more sales, more profit
3. No more dust specks, no more sensor cleaning, just think about the level of weather sealing it could have 8)
scyrene said:I'd love a small macro lens with reasonably long working distance. Would the M's design allow for an equivalent to the 100L macro or 180L in a much smaller package? I've found the M a really good macro camera, with both the 100 and the MP-E - most of the time I'm using Live View for macro work anyway (especially with the MP-E) so the lack of a viewfinder isn't a problem.
But these lenses are rather bulky on the small body.
Etienne said:scyrene said:I'd love a small macro lens with reasonably long working distance. Would the M's design allow for an equivalent to the 100L macro or 180L in a much smaller package? I've found the M a really good macro camera, with both the 100 and the MP-E - most of the time I'm using Live View for macro work anyway (especially with the MP-E) so the lack of a viewfinder isn't a problem.
But these lenses are rather bulky on the small body.
The 100 f/2.8L IS Macro works very well on the EOS-M. I hold the lens by the barrel, and use touch shutter. With IS on, you can get pretty good macro shots. Also good on a tripod. Give it a try!
Haydn1971 said:Current list of Canon EF-M patents...
9-18mm f4.0-5.6
10-20mm f4.0-5.6
16-120mm f3.5-5.6
18-40mm f4.0-5.6 - Pancake
18-55mm f4.0-8.0 - Pancake
18-200mm f3.5-6.3
22-46mm f3.5-5.6 - Pancake
Some odd conflicting sizes here, what's missing are the primes
preppyak said:This is an interesting concept, but, I have to imagine that technologically it'd be pretty complex. And, since those speedboosters all run in the $4-600 range, you're talking a big price addition to any body.ecka said:Canon may end up making a mirrorless body with built-in speedbooster.
1. They would keep the EF mount and all FF lens support
2. No need for FF sensor, lower price, more sales, more profit
3. No more dust specks, no more sensor cleaning, just think about the level of weather sealing it could have 8)
if they implemented that, it'd have to come in a prosumer or higher level body, as they wouldn't be able to price it <$1000 most likely.
Haydn1971 said:Being playing around with my 135L and 35IS today in prep for my highland trip.. Yes, agreed, some more primes would be nice, the 50mm Samyang just isn't doing it for me
crashpc said:Haydn: 70-400mm looks usable to me. It would be nice to have native sharp 50mm f/1.6 IS STM
AvTvM said:not needed. EF 50/1.8 STM via adapter does the trick nicely. Dead sharp. Dirt cheap. Best focus drive for mirrorless. Very compact on EOS-M even with adapter.
AvTvM said:Only EF-M lens really missing is a short tele - EF-M 80mm/2.4 IS STM, as compact as posible and as optically good as 22/2.0 please.
AvTvM said:crashpc said:Haydn: 70-400mm looks usable to me. It would be nice to have native sharp 50mm f/1.6 IS STM
not needed. EF 50/1.8 STM via adapter does the trick nicely. Dead sharp. Dirt cheap. Best focus drive for mirrorless. Very compact on EOS-M even with adapter.
Only EF-M lens really missing is a short tele - EF-M 80mm/2.4 IS STM, as compact as posible and as optically good as 22/2.0 please.