Some EOS M System Information [CR2]

[gmrza]

I think the lack of a serious range of EF-M prime lenses does tend to point towards the probability of a FF EF-M range of lenses in the future.

Of course, there's no reason that new EF-M prime lenses (eg 50mm f/1.8) couldn't be full-frame capable for when they do eventually launch a FF mirrorless.

Either that, or Canon is having trouble with peripheral illumination on the M series, due to the sharper angle of incidence of light reaching the sensor.

Photozone, in at least one of its lens reviews points to the possibility that Canon may have a problem with its APS-C sensors in that they cannot handle light coming from a very oblique angle of incidence:
[quote author=photozone]Unfortunately vignetting is a massive weakness - again. We have seen this problem in our previous EF-M reviews so by now we are pretty confident to state that this isn't solely a lens issue. It seems as if Canon just took their APS-C sensor developed for some of their DSLRs and this just wasn't the smartest thing to do due to much closer distance to the lens' rear element. It seems as if the sensor doesn't like the more extreme light angles towards the corners.
The "raw" light falloff is shockingly high. At 15mm @ f.3.5, the Canon lens holds the new negative record (again) with a whopping 3.6EV(!!!). This is more than double our usual scale for APS-C format lenses! Even at f/11, you can observe a falloff of ~1.4EV (f-stops). The situation isn't quite as bad at 28mm where f/5.6 is sufficient to solve most of the issue. At 45mm it isn't overly relevant anymore.
[/quote]

This problem obviously gets worse at larger apertures. This makes me wonder if Canon has a bit of work to do on its sensors before a faster lens is workable. - Hence the research into curved sensors. One of Canon's patents in this area seems to be focused around combating vignetting.

 

[Rocky]

The curved sensor will make ALL the existing lens become USELESS. Time to buy all new lenses.

 

[gmrza]

The curved sensor will make ALL the existing lens become USELESS. Time to buy all new lenses.

True. Canon will probably need to look at other ways to improve peripheral illumination.

 

[ahsanford]

The curved sensor will make ALL the existing lens become USELESS. Time to buy all new lenses.

You do realize that for precisely that reason, Canon won't offer a curved sensor unless the business will fail without it. Consider the attached...

- A

 

[Loswr]

The curved sensor will make ALL the existing lens become USELESS. Time to buy all new lenses.

The more recent patent was for a sensor with dynamically controlled curvature, which presumably could be flat for existing lenses and curved by varying amounts to accommodate appropriately-designed new lenses.

 

[Zv]

I thought about picking up a used EF-m 18-55 once but it just didn't appeal to me all that much so not bothered if they discontinue it. The newer 18-150 is more appealing thanks to the extra on the long end. It could pull double duty as my telephoto and walk around and complement the 11-22 nicely for a compact kit.

I've come to the conclusion (sadly) that I'm a zoom lens kinda guy and not really into primes. IQ is good enough and the flexibility is more useful than getting an extra stop or two of light. Even if Canon brought out another EF-m prime I'd probably go the zoom route with either 18-150 or the rumored 15-85.

 

[jolyonralph]

You do realize that for precisely that reason, Canon won't offer a curved sensor unless the business will fail without it. Consider the attached...

Oh, I'm so glad you weren't offering Canon advice back in 1986

 

[jolyonralph]

Anyway... the suggestion is that an adjustable curved sensor will

a) be able to take normal EF lenses

b) work better with new lenses that will only work with this new camera.

So, consequently you will be able to use your existing lenses but still will feel the eventual need to buy new lenses to replace your existing ones.

Smart canon.

 

[rrcphoto]

curved sensors are probably for the future powershot line of cameras.

back to the M.. the M most specifically the M3 had a huge problem with vignetting and color casting.

they have a ton of work to do before making faster lenses, or lenses with a higher incident angle that hit the sensor plane.

the problem there is that they have to feel they can sell enough M's to make a custom sensor worth while.

they have for instance, offset microlens patent applications for a while now, so they are certainly thinking about the issue.

I wouldn't be surprised that we don't get really fast primes for the M, that we get f2 primes.

Oh and a 15-85mm .. I'd love it. Count me in on a preorder of that baby, especially if it's another special M lens.

Going by the 18-150, it's going to be special.

and for those complaining about 6.3 .. that's 1/3 an EV over the normal 5.6 .. you really going to miss it?

 

[rrcphoto]

I'm just saying that Canon deliberately withholds higher end product from the EF-S / EF-M portfolio. And yes, you can slap EF glass on a Rebel SLR, EOS-M, I get it. But in EOS-M, I think form factor uniquely matters and folks would appreciate something deliberately made small (but of high quality) for EF-M.

Also, Canon is asking $1,100 for an M5 body. Is it reasonable to opt into a > $1k mirrorless platform that does not offer a single Canon lens over $499 unless you want to adapt something much larger and heavier? Again, I'm not arguing for a full Fuji X series of fast glass -- just a couple tailor-made EF-M nicer lenses to inject life into the platform.

- A

not all canon lenses are larger and heavier.

the 50mm STM is no different in size to the Sony E mount 50mm 1.8

the 24,28,35mm IS USM primes are small and lightweight.

the 40mm is fairly small and lightweight.

while I'm getting the fact that upscale primes etc are needed,it's not as if they don't already exist in the canon ecosystem.

 

[Random Orbits]

I'm on board for a 15-85mm EF-M lens.

Agree that 18mm isn't really wide enough, the M11-22 is my most used M lens, and as I bring additional lenses the order is generally M55-200 > M22/2 > M18-55 > M28 macro.

If the IQ of the M18-150 is equivalent to the M55-200, I'll consider that to replace the 18-55 and 55-200.

For my usage, M22/2 >> M11-22 > M55-200 > M18-55 > M28 macro. I wanted to like the 18-55, but it's too slow indoors and the small max aperture doesn't diffuse the background enough. Perhaps, I'd use the 15-85 more than the 18-55, but I'd have to try the M5 first. Right now, I'd much rather carry the DSLR than the EOS-M. The M is used when DSLRs aren't allowed...

 

[hendrik-sg]

Because nothing says 'higher end zoom' than a 5.6x FL multiplier, variable max aperture and STM.

Ah yes, clearly Canon are stupid for not releasing exactly the lens that you want rather than what they feel will sell better

I'm willing to bet good money on the EF-S 15-85 selling much more than the EF-S 17-55

I think similar, the 17-55 is from a different time, when APS-C was the standard and FF exotic. Just from the pure spec perspective, a 80d with 17-55 is quite similar lika a 6d with 24-105, in size and weight and price as well. So most people would prefer the 6d, because all the fast primes are really nice (and equivalently even faster) on FF.

EF-M is even more about size and weight than a APS-C DLSR, so i think the market for big and heavy fast lenses is even more limited than for APS-C.

This is why i do not really see a BIG market for FF mirrorless, except with pancakes the system gets as big as a normal FF DSLR. Attach a 1kg lens and a flash to any camera, and it's really nice to have the bigger form with solid grip which a 5d offers.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

I'm on board for a 15-85mm EF-M lens.

Agree that 18mm isn't really wide enough, the M11-22 is my most used M lens, and as I bring additional lenses the order is generally M55-200 > M22/2 > M18-55 > M28 macro.

If the IQ of the M18-150 is equivalent to the M55-200, I'll consider that to replace the 18-55 and 55-200.

For my usage, M22/2 >> M11-22 > M55-200 > M18-55 > M28 macro. I wanted to like the 18-55, but it's too slow indoors and the small max aperture doesn't diffuse the background enough. Perhaps, I'd use the 15-85 more than the 18-55, but I'd have to try the M5 first. Right now, I'd much rather carry the DSLR than the EOS-M. The M is used when DSLRs aren't allowed...

That basically summarizes my use of the M system as well (also, to travel light if space is limited) - and for that, it does the job really well... I can shoot RAW and thus keep my workflow identical to if I'd used any of my 5D cameras...

Next on the list will be that 18-150...I just hope the performance is up to snuff and justifies its high(!) price.

 

[Loswr]

I'm on board for a 15-85mm EF-M lens.

Agree that 18mm isn't really wide enough, the M11-22 is my most used M lens, and as I bring additional lenses the order is generally M55-200 > M22/2 > M18-55 > M28 macro.

If the IQ of the M18-150 is equivalent to the M55-200, I'll consider that to replace the 18-55 and 55-200.

For my usage, M22/2 >> M11-22 > M55-200 > M18-55 > M28 macro. I wanted to like the 18-55, but it's too slow indoors and the small max aperture doesn't diffuse the background enough. Perhaps, I'd use the 15-85 more than the 18-55, but I'd have to try the M5 first. Right now, I'd much rather carry the DSLR than the EOS-M. The M is used when DSLRs aren't allowed...

That basically summarizes my use of the M system as well (also, to travel light if space is limited) - and for that, it does the job really well... I can shoot RAW and thus keep my workflow identical to if I'd used any of my 5D cameras...

Next on the list will be that 18-150...I just hope the performance is up to snuff and justifies its high(!) price.

Similar, but I'd add when bringing a dSLR isn't practical as opposed to just not allowed. The M kit has become my default for casual family outings and family travel to familar destinations. Even on major trips (e.g. a family trip to Switzerland, France and Germany last year), while I took both the dSLR and the M kits, the dSLR was only used on my few solo nighttime outings, it was the M kit that I brought with us most of the time.

 

[Dylan777]

I'm on board for a 15-85mm EF-M lens.

Agree that 18mm isn't really wide enough, the M11-22 is my most used M lens, and as I bring additional lenses the order is generally M55-200 > M22/2 > M18-55 > M28 macro.

If the IQ of the M18-150 is equivalent to the M55-200, I'll consider that to replace the 18-55 and 55-200.

For my usage, M22/2 >> M11-22 > M55-200 > M18-55 > M28 macro. I wanted to like the 18-55, but it's too slow indoors and the small max aperture doesn't diffuse the background enough. Perhaps, I'd use the 15-85 more than the 18-55, but I'd have to try the M5 first. Right now, I'd much rather carry the DSLR than the EOS-M. The M is used when DSLRs aren't allowed...

That basically summarizes my use of the M system as well (also, to travel light if space is limited) - and for that, it does the job really well... I can shoot RAW and thus keep my workflow identical to if I'd used any of my 5D cameras...

Next on the list will be that 18-150...I just hope the performance is up to snuff and justifies its high(!) price.

Similar, but I'd add when bringing a dSLR isn't practical as opposed to just not allowed. The M kit has become my default for casual family outings and family travel to familar destinations. Even on major trips (e.g. a family trip to Switzerland, France and Germany last year), while I took both the dSLR and the M kits, the dSLR was only used on my few solo nighttime outings, it was the M kit that I brought with us most of the time.

+1 with Neuro,

I used to carry 1dx with L lenses. I now 100% mirrorless user. I do have some large mirrorless lenses, but fast compact primes are the ones I carry with me. Love the tilt screen, 90% in my shooting.

Can't wait to see Canon FF mirrorless.

 

[ahsanford]

Similar, but I'd add when bringing a dSLR isn't practical as opposed to just not allowed. The M kit has become my default for casual family outings and family travel to familar destinations. Even on major trips (e.g. a family trip to Switzerland, France and Germany last year), while I took both the dSLR and the M kits, the dSLR was only used on my few solo nighttime outings, it was the M kit that I brought with us most of the time.

This is why my next camera (and I haven't bought one since my 5D3 in 2012) is probably going to be one of the following:

• Leica Q
• RX1R II
• The next gen of the Fuji X100 line
• Canon's first FF mirrorless rig: with a fixed 28mm or 35mm lens

I see a small (but not necessarily APS-C) fixed lens rig, even with a quick f/2 FF lens on it, as saving a ton of space in my bag versus the SLR for a deceptive reason. It will probably take up a similar amount of space as my 5D3 with my small 28mm or 35mm IS primes on them. But I think the allure of a fixed lens rig for an overthinker like me is that there's zero opportunity to overdo it and bring more glass. I find that opportunity refreshing.

- A

 

[Dylan777]

Similar, but I'd add when bringing a dSLR isn't practical as opposed to just not allowed. The M kit has become my default for casual family outings and family travel to familar destinations. Even on major trips (e.g. a family trip to Switzerland, France and Germany last year), while I took both the dSLR and the M kits, the dSLR was only used on my few solo nighttime outings, it was the M kit that I brought with us most of the time.

This is why my next camera (and I haven't bought one since my 5D3 in 2012) is probably going to be one of the following:

• Leica Q
• RX1R II
• The next gen of the Fuji X100 line
• Canon's first FF mirrorless rig: with a fixed 28mm or 35mm lens

I see a small (but not necessarily APS-C) fixed lens rig, even with a quick f/2 FF lens on it, as saving a ton of space in my bag versus the SLR for a deceptive reason. It will probably take up a similar amount of space as my 5D3 with my small 28mm or 35mm IS primes on them. But I think the allure of a fixed lens rig for an overthinker like me is that there's zero opportunity to overdo it and bring more glass. I find that opportunity refreshing.

- A

Did have a chance playing with rx1r II couple days, just amazing little guy.

My current are: a7rII, a7sII and recently added a6500 as an outdoor sports cam. All these cams have eye AF. Shooting f1.4 primes @ f1.4 is easy. Hope Canon FF mirrorless will have Eye AF.

 

[gmrza]

curved sensors are probably for the future powershot line of cameras.

back to the M.. the M most specifically the M3 had a huge problem with vignetting and color casting.

they have a ton of work to do before making faster lenses, or lenses with a higher incident angle that hit the sensor plane.

the problem there is that they have to feel they can sell enough M's to make a custom sensor worth while.

they have for instance, offset microlens patent applications for a while now, so they are certainly thinking about the issue.

I wouldn't be surprised that we don't get really fast primes for the M, that we get f2 primes.

Oh and a 15-85mm .. I'd love it. Count me in on a preorder of that baby, especially if it's another special M lens.

Going by the 18-150, it's going to be special.

and for those complaining about 6.3 .. that's 1/3 an EV over the normal 5.6 .. you really going to miss it?

Catch 22!

If Canon doesn't build fast lenses, the customers won't come. If the customers don't come, Canon won't build the fast lenses....

Without taking a risk and building a custom sensor for the M series, Canon will have to try its luck at building volume in the lower end of the market.
That said, this problem has to be dealt with before bringing a full frame mirrorless camera to market - in that space, the problem will be even more pronounced.

 

[dak723]

I'm just saying that Canon deliberately withholds higher end product from the EF-S / EF-M portfolio.

My guess is that they withhold higher end products from the EF-S / EF-M lines because they know that there aren't anywhere near enough buyers for high end products for those lines. The high end lenses are purchased by the consumers that have the high end FF cameras. If I had to guess, I would guess that the target audience for the EF-M is for Rebel users wanting to go mirrorless for their new camera.

 

[rrcphoto]

Catch 22!

If Canon doesn't build fast lenses, the customers won't come. If the customers don't come, Canon won't build the fast lenses....

Without taking a risk and building a custom sensor for the M series, Canon will have to try its luck at building volume in the lower end of the market.
That said, this problem has to be dealt with before bringing a full frame mirrorless camera to market - in that space, the problem will be even more pronounced.

except the customers are already coming.

Canon is by far the largest ILC company out there.

they are also #2 in mirrorless this year.

fast primes don't fit in that much with volume.

the company that people think most of when it comes to mirrorless and primes is Fuji.. and they have one of the lowest marketshares out there.