The Coming EF-M Prime to be 50mm Equivalent for APS-C EOS M [CR2]

midluk

EOS RP
Aug 27, 2015
321
0
ahsanford said:
Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
Canon: "Here's a sweet 35L II. It's dope."

Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
Canon: "Here's a sweet 85 f/1.4L IS. Shoot yetis in total darkness!"

Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
Canon: "Here's a sweet 50 prime... but it's T/S so it has no autofocus, is f/2.8, costs a mint and weighs more than a 24-70 f/.8L II. But I'm pretty sure this is what you've always wanted."

Me: "I really want an autofocusing EF 50mm lens."
Canon: "Here's a sweet 50 prime... equivalent on an EF-M. [snicker]"

Next will likely be a EF 50mm f/1.4 IS nano USM with focus by wire.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,307
3,844
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Just to stir the pot: I wonder if there is an inverse relationship between the release of a fast, high quality prime EF-M lens and the release of a full-frame mirrorless.

Has Canon looked at the market and decided (like Fuji) that APS-C is a better format for all those mirrorless buyers who want a small, light camera? At the same time, might they be saying that the future of APS-C is with mirrorless, not DSLRs?

That's a lot to read into a single lens release, but we shall see.
 

bf

EOS RP
Jul 30, 2014
251
14
I'm not super excited as I like to have a tele-prime for efm mount.
I may buy it if it's faster or at leastleast equal to f1.4 and in $300 neighborhood, which is very unlikely.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Woody said:
Dear Canon,

I really really hope to see an EF-M 30 or 35mm f/1.4 lens like this one here:

It's only 187g.

Please, pretty pretty please.

Cheerio

Careful what you wish for. That design seems to test like the EF 50 f/1.4 -- decent in the center, troublesome on the fringes and you really need to stop it down to make it shine.

I would prefer the performance of Canon's own 35 f/2 over that Fuji, IMHO. I (of all people) love the notion of small + fast glass, but sometimes physics poops on our dreams and we have to make compromises.

- A
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-01-31 at 3.52.18 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-01-31 at 3.52.18 PM.png
    25.5 KB · Views: 143
  • 3692_roz.jpg
    3692_roz.jpg
    59.6 KB · Views: 746

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Tremotino said:
I'm so sorry for you :-\ what's wrong with the 50mm 1:1.4 and 50mm 1:1.2 L canon lenses ?

Oh, Padawan of CR, there's not enough time to answer your question. Forgive me.

Suffice it to say that I'd like an all-purpose sharp 50 prime with Canon first party USM AF and flat plane of focus. Such a lens does not exist.

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
midluk said:
Next will likely be a EF 50mm f/1.4 IS nano USM with focus by wire.

And I'd buy that! FBW is okay (ugh) if it's quicker than STM.

- A
 

NorbR

EOS RP
Jan 15, 2014
256
4
Zürich, Switzerland
Good news :)

Personally I hope they keep it small, so I'm hoping for f/1.8 rather than f/1.4. IS would be good of course, though to be honest I'll probably end up getting this lens even without IS (provided the price remains reasonable of course).
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
NorbR said:
Good news :)

Personally I hope they keep it small, so I'm hoping for f/1.8 rather than f/1.4. IS would be good of course, though to be honest I'll probably end up getting this lens even without IS (provided the price remains reasonable of course).

I'll be candid -- unless it's a mint they ask for, everyone who owns an EOS M will likely buy this lens. Everyone has been asking for fast primes forever on that mount, and here comes one.

The question is whether they'll go fancy / go big with this lens. Might we see our first nano USM EF-M lens? Might we see a standard filter size? Might we get a metal barrel?

Trying to size up if this is a $399 offering or a $699 offering. Presume it's the former, but you never know.

- A
 

NorbR

EOS RP
Jan 15, 2014
256
4
Zürich, Switzerland
ahsanford said:
Trying to size up if this is a $399 offering or a $699 offering. Presume it's the former, but you never know.

I'd be shocked to see anything at $699 or anywhere near that, though I guess it's not impossible if Canon suddenly decided to go for a higher end, f/1.4 IS solidly built lens. But indeed, that's not what I expect.

If anything, it may even be more likely to swing to the other end of the price range. A very cheap, plasticky, 35mm f/1.8 with no IS for $199. A plastic fantastic for the M lineup. That sounds like it would fit right in the current lineup.

I'd prefer $399 with IS and a better build, personally, but I'm not holding my breath ;)
 

vangelismm

EOS 90D
Jul 28, 2015
137
88
ahsanford said:
Tremotino said:
I'm so sorry for you :-\ what's wrong with the 50mm 1:1.4 and 50mm 1:1.2 L canon lenses ?

Oh, Padawan of CR, there's not enough time to answer your question. Forgive me.

Suffice it to say that I'd like an all-purpose sharp 50 prime with Canon first party USM AF and flat plane of focus. Such a lens does not exist.

- A

50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8: Silver Ring, IS, USM. To make company to my 24mm and 35mm.
And i could easily give money to a new 28mm faster then 2.8.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,676
588
S Florida
My mind's eye pictures it looking much like the 11-22 without a zoom ring. The burning question is plastic or metal mount? Bring on the popcorn.
 

dcm

It's not the gear. But it helps.
CR Pro
Apr 18, 2013
972
566
Colorado, USA
brad-man said:
My mind's eye pictures it looking much like the 11-22 without a zoom ring. The burning question is plastic or metal mount? Bring on the popcorn.

... or the telescoping front element. Plastic mount if it isn't a mini pickle jar which I don't expect.

28 IS macro is slightly shorter than the 11-22 and about twice the size of the 22, but appears to have the largest entrance pupil, around 25mm. Not much room to go larger given the mount and electronics. The other lenses seems to be about 20mm entrance pupil, including the Samyang 8mm FE.

I mostly use the 22 in low light situations so another full stop would be great. And more appropriate for the type of low light photos I shoot. With a 25mm entrance pupil, a 33/1.4 is possible. It will be interesting to see the size/aperture/price tradeoff they choose to make.
 

Woody

EOS R
Jul 20, 2010
1,162
88
ahsanford said:
Careful what you wish for. That design seems to test like the EF 50 f/1.4 -- decent in the center, troublesome on the fringes and you really need to stop it down to make it shine.

It is interesting that Canon EF 50 f/1.2L (590g, US$1349) which costs a lot more than the f/1.4 version has worse off performance than the latter:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/472-canon_50_12_5d?start=1

The el cheapo EF 50 f/1.8 STM beats them both:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/905-canon_50_18stm?start=1

In comparison, Nikon AF-S 50 f/1.4 G lens weighs (280g, US$460) slightly less than the Canon equivalent (290g, US$349), but has superlative performance:
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/441-nikkor_afs_50_14_ff?start=1

Conclusion?

Sometimes, it's possible to design a light weight (and relatively cheap) lens that has great optical performance.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,676
588
S Florida
dcm said:
brad-man said:
My mind's eye pictures it looking much like the 11-22 without a zoom ring. The burning question is plastic or metal mount? Bring on the popcorn.

... or the telescoping front element. Plastic mount if it isn't a mini pickle jar.

28 IS macro is slightly shorter than the 11-22 and about twice the size of the 22, but appears to have the largest entrance pupil, around 25mm. Not much room to go larger given the mount and electronics. The other lenses seems to be about 20mm entrance pupil, including the Samyang 8mm FE.

I mostly use the 22 in low light situations so another full stop would be great. And more appropriate for the type of low light photos I shoot. With a 25mm entrance pupil, a 33/1.4 is possible. It will be interesting to see the size/aperture/price tradeoff they choose to make.

"We know for sure that it’s not a 30mm lens and that it’ll be faster than f/2." This insures that I will be picking up one of these. I hope & expect that it will have IS, but I want one either way. These poor little crop sensors need all the light they can get :) It will be interesting to see whether it performs like a nifty fifty or a 35 IS. I'm hoping for the latter, but, again, I'll get one either way.
 

eosuser1234

EOS 90D
Jul 16, 2013
162
35
Japan.
I would not be suprised if this projects an image large enough so it could be used on a FF EF-M mount camera. That way you get a 50mm equivelent when used on APS-C, and the same lense can be the 35mm on Full Frame Ef-M mount.
Kill two birds with one stone in terms of their lens line up.
 

woodman411

EOS 90D
Aug 1, 2017
152
197
USA
Woody said:
ahsanford said:
Careful what you wish for. That design seems to test like the EF 50 f/1.4 -- decent in the center, troublesome on the fringes and you really need to stop it down to make it shine.

It is interesting that Canon EF 50 f/1.2L (590g, US$1349) which costs a lot more than the f/1.4 version has worse off performance than the latter:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/472-canon_50_12_5d?start=1

The el cheapo EF 50 f/1.8 STM beats them both:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/905-canon_50_18stm?start=1

In comparison, Nikon AF-S 50 f/1.4 G lens weighs (280g, US$460) slightly less than the Canon equivalent (290g, US$349), but has superlative performance:
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/441-nikkor_afs_50_14_ff?start=1

Conclusion?

Sometimes, it's possible to design a light weight (and relatively cheap) lens that has great optical performance.

You picked the worst L lens to make your point :) Even then, I would still pick the 50L for people, even if it doesn't have the sharpness. If you shoot people, I have not experienced one small prime that I liked, no matter what the internet specs and numbers say. For me it's all about rendering and micro-contrast and skin color and 3d effect, things that aren't technically measured but visibly seen and felt (for those that say there is no such thing as 3d effect, an extreme example of this can be seen in this comparison between an iPhone and a Canon M100: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1321817752/iphone-x-portrait-mode-versus-ilc-dslr-camera . The fact is, the smaller the lens, the flatter the image, at least for close 3d objects like people's heads.)

If you shoot landscapes, the online reviews are more relevant, since their technical testings are against flat surfaces and focus on resolution/sharpness/etc, things that are not as important for portraits.

Anyway, it seems high end primes are going the other direction, they're getting bigger and more expensive, like Sigma's ART line and Canon's 85 1.4 IS. I wouldn't mind a non-pancake design with IS and consequently larger size, I couldn't stand how people's faces rendered with the efm 22 pancake (yes, I know 22 is wide for portraits, and yes, I actually like taking portraits with 22 (35 equiv)).
 

HaroldC3

EOS 90D
Jul 6, 2014
120
44
Meanwhile, Sony will have announced at least 2 more bodies before September. Wake me up when Canon actually releases an EF-M lens.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
neuroanatomist said:
ahsanford said:
Might we get a metal barrel?

Have you not used or held a current EF-M lens?

Only the 22mm pancake with the original EOS M body years ago. Presumed all of these (other than the mount feature) were plastic -- not true?

- A
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,938
Canada
Woody said:
ahsanford said:
Careful what you wish for. That design seems to test like the EF 50 f/1.4 -- decent in the center, troublesome on the fringes and you really need to stop it down to make it shine.

It is interesting that Canon EF 50 f/1.2L (590g, US$1349) which costs a lot more than the f/1.4 version has worse off performance than the latter:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/472-canon_50_12_5d?start=1

The el cheapo EF 50 f/1.8 STM beats them both:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/905-canon_50_18stm?start=1

In comparison, Nikon AF-S 50 f/1.4 G lens weighs (280g, US$460) slightly less than the Canon equivalent (290g, US$349), but has superlative performance:
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/441-nikkor_afs_50_14_ff?start=1

Conclusion?

Sometimes, it's possible to design a light weight (and relatively cheap) lens that has great optical performance.
yes, but the 50F1.8 is famous for its inconsistent AF.....