Haydn1971 said:
I agree it's to keep lenses as small/light as possible. Personally, I'm not too fussed about it. If I'm going to use a CPL or ND, I'm likely setting up on a tripod...in which case, I wouldn't be using the M.
Upvote
0
Next official EF-M Lens
- Thread starter Haydn1971
- Start date
I agree it's to keep lenses as small/light as possible. Personally, I'm not too fussed about it. If I'm going to use a CPL or ND, I'm likely setting up on a tripod...in which case, I wouldn't be using the M.
Al tough I wonder if "they" listen to our dreams, I'd like to have a nice fast native prime EF-M portrait lens. Something between 65-95mm F2 or faster! Like what the u3/4 guys use for street portraits in our APS-C system with much nicer bokeh!
Upvote
0
P
pablo
Guest
Canon shouldn't make any more specific ef-m lenses in my opinion, i say this as a huge fan of the m, eyebrows may raise, so here's my logic:
- The m is already well served with all feasable focal lengths. you want more than 200mm? You don't want a pocket camera
- The lenses that exist are modestly priced, okay, lacking l's or super fast apertures, if you want those you really want an slr
- at the moment the m is effectively discontinued in the us and eu. no m2. m marked down and selling out. we need a new m model, perhaps with more external control etc to suit more advanced users also
- I think the key to the success of the m system is the gateway to the ef-s and ef system. The ef-m basics are well covered. I would like to see a lower cost canon branded adaptor, perhaps ef-s only, and made of plastic (strong enough to handle the existing ef-s lenses, all consumer grade) say for £30 rather than £100' or even free in the box...., if folk want access to ef then let them pay more, or give then a deal when buying their mX
I would guess that the majority of folk in eu or us are buying an m to augment their eos system.
- i would rather see canon get back to making more lower cost primes, if nikon can make a g grade 35mm f2 then why can't canon (anymore) the old 24 28 and 35 were super, compact, cheap, perfect for ff ef, users, accesable to the rebel market, and adaptable to the m (and still compact, even with adaptor)
At this exact moment in time, the m looks like a dead end in western markets. Don't get me wrong, I love mine (bought a second yesterday) but I feel its greatest success will be acheived as a gateway camera to an established and well serviced system (upper hand over nex, m43, nx etc)
The m system has enough of it's own lenses that are specific to the m, the real value for me lies in adaptability, and better budget offerings from Canon, which they did once, which nikon can do, and which would enliven the health if the ef system as a whole and have a trickle down for the m.
- The m is already well served with all feasable focal lengths. you want more than 200mm? You don't want a pocket camera
- The lenses that exist are modestly priced, okay, lacking l's or super fast apertures, if you want those you really want an slr
- at the moment the m is effectively discontinued in the us and eu. no m2. m marked down and selling out. we need a new m model, perhaps with more external control etc to suit more advanced users also
- I think the key to the success of the m system is the gateway to the ef-s and ef system. The ef-m basics are well covered. I would like to see a lower cost canon branded adaptor, perhaps ef-s only, and made of plastic (strong enough to handle the existing ef-s lenses, all consumer grade) say for £30 rather than £100' or even free in the box...., if folk want access to ef then let them pay more, or give then a deal when buying their mX
I would guess that the majority of folk in eu or us are buying an m to augment their eos system.
- i would rather see canon get back to making more lower cost primes, if nikon can make a g grade 35mm f2 then why can't canon (anymore) the old 24 28 and 35 were super, compact, cheap, perfect for ff ef, users, accesable to the rebel market, and adaptable to the m (and still compact, even with adaptor)
At this exact moment in time, the m looks like a dead end in western markets. Don't get me wrong, I love mine (bought a second yesterday) but I feel its greatest success will be acheived as a gateway camera to an established and well serviced system (upper hand over nex, m43, nx etc)
The m system has enough of it's own lenses that are specific to the m, the real value for me lies in adaptability, and better budget offerings from Canon, which they did once, which nikon can do, and which would enliven the health if the ef system as a whole and have a trickle down for the m.
Upvote
0
P
pablo
Guest
to be fair, you could adapt a 50mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.4... and still have a great compact portrait kit.
Canon just aren't going to make a budget f1.2...
Samyang have came into the market with ef-m dedicated 12 f2.0... I personally would prefer an EF or EF-s version, as at this price point I wouldn't want the lens to die with my M. And if I could also use it on my 7 or 600... win win win win win.
Canon just aren't going to make a budget f1.2...
Samyang have came into the market with ef-m dedicated 12 f2.0... I personally would prefer an EF or EF-s version, as at this price point I wouldn't want the lens to die with my M. And if I could also use it on my 7 or 600... win win win win win.
Upvote
0
For the current EOSM body, considering the AF problems and lack of MF needs ([crisp] view finder or a polished manual focus interface similar to what fuji xt-1 has) I don't like the adapter idea. Besides, someone like me bought this since it was cheap and I don't have an EF or EFS system around me! Nowadays in USA you can find deals for a genuine adapter around $50; however I could not find a role to consider it yet.
On the other hand, I do like to see a prosumer mirror-less body with the EF mount. I prefer it with a full-frame sensor cheaper than 6d! Something like Sony's Alpha 7 line.
On the other hand, I do like to see a prosumer mirror-less body with the EF mount. I prefer it with a full-frame sensor cheaper than 6d! Something like Sony's Alpha 7 line.
Upvote
0
I wonder if I would have had the native 22 (I love 35mm FF) instead of the adapter and my lineup of glass that I would have kept the M. Would that really have been a tradeoff for all the other reasons I didn't personally like the body?
I really WANT to like the M but I'm too attached to a viewfinder. Funny though I would never think of that issue when shooting with my phone.
I really WANT to like the M but I'm too attached to a viewfinder. Funny though I would never think of that issue when shooting with my phone.
Upvote
0
P
pablo
Guest
native 22 is a beautiful wee lens, slightly nostalgic to shoot on 35mm framing... I had an old SR-T303 with a 35mm f1.8
Upvote
0
pablo said:
Yes, exactly that. You can easily use a FD 50 f/1.4 with an adaptor (which I have done btw and it works great) and still retain a certain amount of compactness. Yes it would be nice to see an EF-M 50mm prime but it's never going to be f/1.2, maybe f/1.8 if we're lucky. Why? Think about what and who this camera was intended for. We already know that the majority of rebel owners only use the kit lens so we could probably extend that to the M and say that most would use the kit lens or lenses that come with the camera. Established photographers who need that little extra shallow DOF look are more than likely already shooting with EF primes on a FF camera, in which case the M only functions as a secondary or back up body. That's how I view the M - not as a complete solution but more as an addition to an existing Canon kit.
Besides a 50mm f/1.2 made exclusively for the M would likely be too expensive for most people that the M is marketed for. How many would they sell? Not likely that many compared to say a 50mm f/2 IS STM that was priced at a few hundred bucks.
Upvote
0
P
pablo
Guest
or a pancake 50mm f2 IS in EF mount.... much more incentive for canon. all eos users happy.
Upvote
0
pablo said:
there is already the wonderful 40/2.8 pancake. It has STM focus drive and terefor works really nicely with adapter on the EOS-M. No need for a 50mm pancake in addition.
BUT ... I'd buy a similarly good/compact and cheap EF 75mm/2.8 "pancake" immediately. As a matter of fact I'd pre-order it.
Personally I have no desire whatsover for f/1.2 lenses, and least of all for 50 or 55mm focal length. Neither for EF, nor for EF-S nor for EF-M. All I want is a newly designed, kick-ass EF 50/1.4 II IS that even surpasses the Sigma 50 Art - at a price below USD/€ 1000.
Upvote
0
A 50/1.2 would be roughly equivalent to 85mm, f1.8/2.0 on FF - couple that with the compact size of the an M-mount and that would be a sweet/compact combo in low light or for portraits.
Source:
http://www.pointsinfocus.com/tools/depth-of-field-and-equivalent-lens-calculator/#fmt=7&ap=1.189207&fl=50&dst=10&u=us
Source:
http://www.pointsinfocus.com/tools/depth-of-field-and-equivalent-lens-calculator/#fmt=7&ap=1.189207&fl=50&dst=10&u=us
Upvote
0
P
pablo
Guest
AvTvM said:pablo said:
there is already the wonderful 40/2.8 pancake. It has STM focus drive and terefor works really nicely with adapter on the EOS-M. No need for a 50mm pancake in addition.
BUT ... I'd buy a similarly good/compact and cheap EF 75mm/2.8 "pancake" immediately. As a matter of fact I'd pre-order it.
Personally I have no desire whatsover for f/1.2 lenses, and least of all for 50 or 55mm focal length. Neither for EF, nor for EF-S nor for EF-M. All I want is a newly designed, kick-ass EF 50/1.4 II IS that even surpasses the Sigma 50 Art - at a price below USD/€ 1000.
But a pancake 50mm f2 IS would be a stop faster and have IS. Also on APS-C (the M format for the time being) it would be equivalent to roughly 80mm, so a nice short tele for portraits. I find the idea of a 40mm just a bit befuddling on aps-c, especially with an unexceptional aperture.
If we were talking about full frame, yeah I can see the point. On APS-c all I can see that the 40mm has going for it is the quirk factor. Just an opinion.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
