Two EF-M Primes Coming in Q1 2016 [CR2]

[Canon Rumors]

<p>Canon and the rest of the web have mentioned before that the company is going to become more aggressive with their mirrorless camera system the EOS M. We’re eager to see what “aggressive” truly means, because as it sits right now, we’re pretty tepid about EOS M.</p>
<p>We’re told Canon will introduce two new EF-M prime lenses in Q1 of 2016. Both of these lenses will be slightly upmarket in build and design when compared to the current crop of EF-M lenses.</p>
<p>No specifications were given at this time.</p>

 

[infared]

New Primes...but they will most likely be slow as this camera is clearly aimed at amateurs, certainly not even enthusiasts. How about a Viewfinder, Canon??????????
I love my 5DIII and all of my great glass for when I am serious.
...and I can be more than semi-serious with my 3 Olympus MFT bodies and 13 MFT lenses. That system is small, competent and incredibly fun to use. It is a great "small" system that pretty much does it all except TS.
It makes photography fun again!!!! ;D

 

[photogreedy]

Does the 15-45 look like with a plastic mount to anyone else as well?

 

[Dylan777]

mirrorless + decent fast compact prime pancakes = winner

 

[AvTvM]

I don't want them "upmarket" but rather as dirt cheap, small and optically excellent as the EF-M 22/2.0.
so please no fuji 56/1.2 @ 1200 € or a sony 55/1.8 half-zeiss @ 800 € nor a sony zeiss-badge 35/2.8 for 600.

However, knowing Canon i expect the most boring abd bland of all possibilities: a 50/1.8 STM (in line with the EF 50/1.8 STM) and a 60/2.8 macro (in line with the EF-S).

I'd be willing to buy a super compact portrait tele - eg. EF-M 80/2.0 or f/2.4 IS STM priced no higher than EF 85/1.8.

 

[sanj]

I was made to believe Canon is industry 'leader'.

 

[ahsanford]

C'mon Canon, focus speed matters on all fronts -- not just with the camera. Give us some USM primes.

I don't need an L lens for EF-M and I know they won't give one to us. But give us a proper mid-level USM primes for EF-M like the 24/28/35 IS lenses for EF, hopefully in a smaller form factor since you don't need to cover the FF image circle.

Give us those and an integral EVF and I might consider buying into EOS-M as a second body. Until then, no sale.

- A

 

[catfish252]

"Both of these lenses will be slightly upmarket in build and design when compared to the current crop of EF-M lenses." Translation - These lenses will be more expensive than the other lenses we have offered in the past.

 

[ahsanford]

I don't want them "upmarket" but rather as dirt cheap, small and optically excellent as the EF-M 22/2.0.
so please no fuji 56/1.2 @ 1200 € or a sony 55/1.8 half-zeiss @ 800 € nor a sony zeiss-badge 35/2.8 for 600.

However, knowing Canon i expect the most boring abd bland of all possibilities: a 50/1.8 STM (in line with the EF 50/1.8 STM) and a 60/2.8 macro (in line with the EF-S).

I'd be willing to buy a super compact portrait tele - eg. EF-M 80/2.0 or f/2.4 IS STM priced no higher than EF 85/1.8.

All current EF-M mount glass currently available is here: http://goo.gl/se2GjN

AvTvM, a native EF-M macro like the EF-S 60mm makes a lot of sense. If the rumor is true, I'd bet one of the two lenses in this story is a macro like that.

As much as I want an EF-M 22mm f/2 USM (i.e not pancake, but a fully-featured speedy focusing prime), since there already is an EF-M 22mm I doubt that's in the next wave.

A portrait prime optimized for the EF-M mount would be nice, say a 55 f/1.8. Before you lament that we already have a new STM nifty fifty, that lens needs to be adaptored and it's meant for the large EF image circle. I could see a 50-ish prime at a decent quality level (metal ring, FTM focusing, USM, a proper hood, etc.) optimized for EF-M that would not be that big. I imagine that lens would sell well, say for about $399.

- A

 

[crashpc]

55mm f/1.8 IS STM would be nice indeed.

 

[ahsanford]

"Both of these lenses will be slightly upmarket in build and design when compared to the current crop of EF-M lenses." Translation - These lenses will be more expensive than the other lenses we have offered in the past.

That's great news, actually. If the brand is to go up-market (presumably alongside a higher-end EOS-M body), they need better native EF-M lenses to draw bigger spenders in.

Consider, some of the current EF-M lenses lack a ton of creature comforts that enthusiasts or pros (stepping down to use this as a third body, vacation rig, etc.) might want. I'd love to see:

• Proper bayonet hood instead of those chintzy pancake rings
• USM instead of STM (heck, some don't even have STM, right?)
• Nailing down a standard filter diameter wouldn't hurt -- right now they are all over the map: 43, 49, 55, 58, which means that awesome bag full of tiny lenses will require a bag full of tiny filters or step down rings.
• If we are getting really fancy, an LCD/OLED display of the working DOF distances like the Zeiss Batis lenses -- but I think that's an future L quality ask and not an EF-M reasonable thing to expect

So I say bring on the $500-750 lenses for EF-M to complement the $200-400 stuff that's already available. Build up the brand and expand the user base.

- A

 

[scrup]

The only way i will buy EF-M lenses if it was dirt cheap.

I have a bunch of legacy primes that work well enough for me. If i was going to spend some coin, i would just go with EF mount. I have the option of moving to other bodies with adapters. AF is not quite there yet or at a reasonable price but there are some advancements on the sony front with adapting EF glass to sony bodies. Time will improve this.

For me size is not an issue. The M was a DSLR replacement not a compact camera replacement. I have my phone when i can compromise on quality for portability.

 

[cellomaster27]

honestly, with the news that Canon may be working on a full frame mirrorless.. and the possibility of a change in mount? I don't want to commit to more lenses for the M system for the moment. First, I want to see a good eos-m body. I think when I bought my eos m, I was doing more of a brand service instead of product service. Granted it was 250 for the whole kit when I bought mine.

 

[Pixel]

I'm not saying I'm going to dump all my Canon gear anytime soon but if Canon doesn't have a mirrorless EF mount planned they're going to lose my mirrorless purchase to Sony where I CAN use my EF mount glass. I'm not about to buy a whole new set of lenses.

 

[roxics]

I think Canon should ditch EF-S altogether. Steamline their product offerings by making only APS-C EF-M cameras and lens and full frame EF cameras and lenses. Even if they eventually go mirrorless on full frame, there is no reason to change the mount. Just take out the mirrorbox but keep the same flange to focal distance. Not everything needs to be smaller for the sake of being smaller, especially pro bodies. There are still benefits to having an EVF even if you don't change the flange to focal distance.

 

[traveller]

I think that it makes sense to concentrate on moderately fast designs for the current EOS-M series. I should know, I own the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 and whilst it's a beautiful lens, I only carry it when I know I'll need it, because of the weight. That's the penalty for trying to get "full frame equivalence". I would have been happier with a 56mm f/2 -lighter and cheaper. Canon don't need to force huge aperture lenses onto EOS-M, they have plenty of full frame DSLRs if that's what you want (and a hybrid OVF/EVF viewfinder or accessory EVF would be the icing on the cake of the 5D Mk.4 - hey, I'm allowed to dream!).

Full frame is the elephant in the room with EOS-M. I'm not sure that it is actually needed, full frame means bigger lenses and a larger system size. Mirrorless only really has size benefits at the wide end of the lens range. This argument won't stop the enthusiast buyer holding back on an investment in (these rumoured) high quality EF-M lenses in the expectation that Canon will eventually bring out a full frame mirrorless system.

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm not saying I'm going to dump all my Canon gear anytime soon but if Canon doesn't have a mirrorless EF mount planned they're going to lose my mirrorless purchase to Sony where I CAN use my EF mount glass. I'm not about to buy a whole new set of lenses.

There is no way on earth Canon are going to make a mirrorless system that doesn't integrate with EF lenses seamlessly, just look at the introduction of the M to EF/s adapter on release of the original M. Canon know the EF lens stable is the crown jewel of their camera sales and bypassing it would be inconceivable.

As for Sony and the " I CAN use my EF mount glass", well exactly the same thing was said about the Nikn F mount until people realized the rediculous list of caveats and limitations involved. There are many reports of issues, incompatabilities, and non functioning or lackluster performance with the Sony plus adapter.

 

[Haydn1971]

Could be anything really.... 10mm ultrawide, 35-40mm ish midrange, 50-55mm standard, or something longer... It has to be in a tiny package no bigger than a 18-55mm though...

 

[ahsanford]

I think Canon should ditch EF-S altogether. Steamline their product offerings by making only APS-C EF-M cameras and lens and full frame EF cameras and lenses. Even if they eventually go mirrorless on full frame, there is no reason to change the mount. Just take out the mirrorbox but keep the same flange to focal distance. Not everything needs to be smaller for the sake of being smaller, especially pro bodies. There are still benefits to having an EVF even if you don't change the flange to focal distance.

There is a raging debate on this right now on the FF mirrorless post from a few days ago.

Canon can't reasonably support 4 mounts. They have tough decisions to make by the time FF mirrorless arrives.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Mirrorless only really has size benefits at the wide end of the lens range.

This. A+.

That's why I think EOS-M needs to concentrate on being as small as possible. Don't go for 55-200+ zooms, get away from a 70-200 f/2.8 equivalent. That's not what this platform is for!

FF mirrorless will 100% be big and nasty because the pros will expect to use all their EF glass (or new native FF mirrorless glass) on it and as those are huge, a bigger/grippier body will be needed. I'm not saying it will be Leica SL big or 5D3 big, but it will likely be bigger than the A7 rigs coming out today.

- A