small primes to go with SL1?

[axtstern]

Me usually going for the cheap old 2nd Hand solutions would advice :
Sigma 14mm 3.5
was already good value second Hand and will now drop more in Price with the art line replacement ant portas.

Sigma 30mm 1.4
really small, old school lens, not sure if the electronic works with anything newer than 60d

Canon 85mm 1.8
for midrange

Canon 200mm 2.8 L
for longrange, not really small but way smaller than the 70 200 zooms

The complete range costs 2nd Hand arround 1200 Euro

regards

 

[willis]

How about pancakes?
Like 40mm F/2.8 or Voightländer 20mm F/3.5

 

[Sella174]

Given the way Canon has "crippled" the 100D down to "entry-level" specifications, I do not think we can expect any EF-S primes. Canon should have brought these primes out years ago, basically as soon as they went with APS-C - in order to replace the 50mm f/1.8 as a "first prime" for budding photographers. They didn't, as they reason that that part of the market only wants zoom lenses (although the "higher" demographic is also primarily into zooms ... 16-35mm, 24-70mm, 24-105mm, 70-200mm, 100-400mm, etc.)

Canon has, in my opinion, created a bit of a problem for themselves with the 100D. It is definitely a camera with the sole purpose of preventing current "users" not to buy m4/3, as once you go there it's lost business for Canon. Yet, bringing out EF-S primes will keep people, as they grow photographically, in the APS-C segment. This bites into their "full-frame" business, with its inflated price tag, as "full-frame" basically loses a lot of its appeal - because you get the same from EF-S (and currently from m4/3).

Canon sees APS-C as (1) a method of selling cheap DSLR's to the masses, and (b) an "upgrade path" towards their expensive "full-frame" offerings. The new 100D makes it obvious that they are losing serious ground on point (1) to m4/3 and other "mirrorless" systems. Yet if they make EF-S a serious form-factor with dedicated primes and decent tele-photo lenses, then they lose on point (2).

Canon, just like Pentax, has not kept up with their market.

 

[Random Orbits]

Given the way Canon has "crippled" the 100D down to "entry-level" specifications, I do not think we can expect any EF-S primes. Canon should have brought these primes out years ago, basically as soon as they went with APS-C - in order to replace the 50mm f/1.8 as a "first prime" for budding photographers. They didn't, as they reason that that part of the market only wants zoom lenses (although the "higher" demographic is also primarily into zooms ... 16-35mm, 24-70mm, 24-105mm, 70-200mm, 100-400mm, etc.)

Canon has, in my opinion, created a bit of a problem for themselves with the 100D. It is definitely a camera with the sole purpose of preventing current "users" not to buy m4/3, as once you go there it's lost business for Canon. Yet, bringing out EF-S primes will keep people, as they grow photographically, in the APS-C segment. This bites into their "full-frame" business, with its inflated price tag, as "full-frame" basically loses a lot of its appeal - because you get the same from EF-S (and currently from m4/3).

Canon sees APS-C as (1) a method of selling cheap DSLR's to the masses, and (b) an "upgrade path" towards their expensive "full-frame" offerings. The new 100D makes it obvious that they are losing serious ground on point (1) to m4/3 and other "mirrorless" systems. Yet if they make EF-S a serious form-factor with dedicated primes and decent tele-photo lenses, then they lose on point (2).

Canon, just like Pentax, has not kept up with their market.

I don't think Canon is afraid of APS-C threatening full frame. For the same generation of technology, FF will win in low light/high ISO/noise and shallower DOF. Does that matter to the masses? Probably not, but it's probably why most FF users are using FF.

I also don't see much advantage for Canon to release EF-S primes. The 35/2 and 50/1.4 are fairly small and light already, and a lot of people balk at forking 1k for a EF-S lens (i.e. 17-55 f/2.8). People also want lenses that are FF compatible in case they decide to move in that direction in the future. Perhaps an EF-S 15 f/1.4 might make sense, but I don't think that there'd be a large market to make it worthwhile.

 

[kubelik]

I'd argue that the 100D is not "crippled" at all, it's actually very competitive against the supposed "flagship Rebel" (Canon's own words, not mine). it's the t5i that's quite awkward as a 2013 lineup product.

given that Canon did design a 22mm f/2 STM pancake for its new M mount, I wonder how hard it would be for them to upscale it slightly and make a similar 22mm f/2 for the EF-S? anybody with optical/manufacturing experience able to weigh in on that?

 

[funkboy]

given that Canon did design a 22mm f/2 STM pancake for its new M mount, I wonder how hard it would be for them to upscale it slightly and make a similar 22mm f/2 for the EF-S? anybody with optical/manufacturing experience able to weigh in on that?

They're completely different lenses. The short 18mm flange focal distance of EF-M means that 22mm doesn't need to be a retrofocus design, which is generally harder to pull off well & needs more glass. EF-S pushes the rear element of EF's normal 44mm flange focal distance back a bit to something like 38mm (hard to find the exact data), but it still has to clear the reflex mirror so there's only so much that can be done.

 

[preppyak]

Although I see the logic in creating small wide EF-S primes, I don't know think that the market is big enough for Canon to make it a priority. It is also telling that Sigma has yet to bother maker wider fast EF-S lenses after making the 30mm f/1.4.

Well, and it's also a price thing. Creating a 30mm lens for APS-C isn't that hard from a technical perspective, whereas creating a 15mm or 20mm is tougher. Especially if you want it to do f/1.4 or f/1.8. For example, Sigma makes a 20mm f/1.8, but, it both costs a decent amount and sucks. And nobody really makes anything faster than f/2.8 once you get lower than 24mm.

Come on Canon, the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM is the one aspect of that system that draws praise; surely an EF-S mount version is not beyond reason? If that is a success, how about an EF-S 15mm f/2.8 as well?

Why wait for Canon to put out a 15mm f/2.8 when Rokinon/Samyang have a perfectly useable and cheap 14mm f/2.8 lens that is great. The only advantage of the EF-S is that it might be able to use filters, but, then again Samyang prototyped a 10mm f/2,8 prime, and that couldn't use filters either.

 

[preppyak]

Sigma 30mm 1.4
really small, old school lens, not sure if the electronic works with anything newer than 60d

They actually just updated this lens, so, while not as cheap, it should work with all newer cameras.

And I'd go with the Samyang 14mm over the Sigma, but, there's also the Tokina 17mm too. Not a lot of great wide options if you are going for small