Patent: Canon EF-M 10mm f/2.8 Fisheye

Not the lens I want, but if this means proof of life for the M-system I'll take it!

I love fisheyes. Currently, I use the 8-15 L, which is just too big and bulky on the M for travel use, so I was considering a third party one - would much prefer an EF-M version. It's an important lens for me,

For me this would make a nice and lightweight 360 degree panorama solution on my EOS M5. I already own a M-Mount converted m43 Samyang fisheye, but the quality is not as good (especially with flare resistance) as I'm used to from my 6DII with the Canon 8-15mm fisheye.

Frank

Hasn't the death of the EOS M system been predicted right here on this forum?
The latest lens announcement - developments seem to contradict these fears! Looks like the EOS M could be meant as a replacement for the APS DSLR series.

only by a few who either have little clue and/or are some sort of FUD-trolls.

It was and is not hard to see that Canon goes with M/EF-M for APS-C and with EOS R/RF for FF image circle (exclusively).

Fisheye. Fine, but not for me. I want a moderately fast, short EF-M tele prime - something between 75-85mm and f/2.0 to f/2.4 with IQ as good as EF-M 22/2.0 and similar price tag

I will be interested in this lens if it's lightweight (below 200g) and low-priced.

Have used the Canon 8-15L on FF and APS-C bodies (Rebel and M series). A bit bulky for the M when hiking and backpacking so I picked up the Samyang 8mm f2.8 Fisheye II about 4 years ago. It provides a diagonal fisheye at 8mm and has been fine for my purposes. Manual focus is easy on the M3 and M5 with focus peaking, especially since the DOF is so large on an 8mm lens. The Samyang weighs 260g to the 540g for the 8-15L (plus the extender when used with the M series). Under 200g seems unlikely.

The Canon has a .16m MFD versus .3m on the Samyang. The closer MFD has provided some interesting shots since it allows the lens to nearly touch the subject. Not nearly as dramatic with the Samyang.

To do a quick comparison I took a few sample shots in my office to compare the Samyang 8mm with the Canon at both 8mm and 10mm on my M3. At 8mm the Canon shows the edge of the image circle in the frame while the Samyang 8mm does not. At 10mm the Canon provides the diagonal fisheye view, but is slightly narrower angle of view then the Samyang's 167 degree AOV. The Samyang provides 180 degrees on other APS formats.

The Samyang appears to be equal or better in image quality to the 8-15L at f/4, f/5.6, and f/8 in these sample images, and if offers f2.8. These images were taken in less than ideal lighting conditions under heavy overcast. Only noise reduction and scaling were applied. It might be worth trying again under better conditions using the M5 for comparison. For now the Samyang seems up to the task - glad I didn't wait for Canon to release one.

Will be interesting to see if anything comes of this patent. Another EF-M Fisheye patent was posted earlier this year: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/updated-patent-ef-15mm-f-4-ef-m-9-5mm-f-4.34241

I bought a cheap Chinese fish-eye zoom, and although it's MF, it works really well.
AF isn't very important in a fish-eye lens anyway.

A strange lens for EF-M but if it is moderately low price (the low number of lenses and the 3.5 mm max aperture diameter give a hint to low production cost) and has excellent flare resistance (low lens / element count supports this) it will be interesting for some applications of more scientific use. And if it's contrasty and sharp defishing is an option for some applications.

Please let a f/4.0 10mm IS rectilinear lens follow!

Though no EOS M user I love to see that Canon still puts efforts into this system and if this patent becomes true it‘ll be a cool lens

sorry, but it is not a case of "still puts effort in". Canon will soon offer APC-S sensored MILCs only as EOS M with EF-M lenses. What is difficult to understand here? No more Rebel mirrorslappers, no 90D, no 7D III. Or myabe yes, but then they'll be the last marginal iteration of Canon crop mirrorslappers. After that it will be EOS M/EF-M for APS-C image circle and R/RF for "full-frame" (36x24mm).

This is how small and lightweight a 360 Pano Setup can be. The slanted adaptor is exactly manufactured for the M5 with my Samyang Fisheye lens to be rotated around the NPP. Most probably I would need a second such an adaptor (or at least a second hole for the camera mount screw) with this Canon lens (if it is really in the works).

With the rumor of an APS-C equipped EOS R body I wouldn't put "all in" on this "only" opinion.
To me it's the opposite. To me EOS M is the pure consumer line, the "keep it small line".
Reasons:

• We haven't seen any patents for wide aperture EF-M lenses yet, especially no zooms - AFAIK.
• The EF to EF-M adapter is soso, esp. looking at the AF performance.
• There cannot (!) be an RF to EF-M adapter because of the flange distance.
• Not every prosumer/enthusiast wants or needs FF.
• We have just one f/2.0 and one f/1.4 EF-M yet. Everything else starts at least from f/3.5.

Not "sorry", but to me it makes totally sense that there will be an APS-C EOS R line for prosumer/enthusiast/birders/etc.

aha! 360 panos / VR ... that explains why Canon might well add a compact fisheye lens to the EF-M lineup!

i don't see any need or chance for APS-C sensors in Canon EOS R line. The sole reason, why crop sensored imaging products exist are size and price. Both objectives are perfectly met with EOS M/EF-M.

R-mount is perfect for FF and will be used exclusively for FF, simply because R-mount bodies with crop sensor and lenses for it could never be made as compact as EF-M gear. Canon people in charge have confirmed this in a recent interview. APS-C in EOS R line does not make sense: neither techically, nor commercially.

compact and affordable = EOS M, EF-M plus option to use all EF and EF-S glass. original Canon EF/EF-M adapter works perfectly well, no issues whatsoever (i have it, i use it). limited AF performance is an issue only with some older EF lenses that were not designed for use in live view/mirrorless mode.

With launch of M5/M6 and especially M50 and subsequent EF-M lenses (28 macro, 18-150, 32/1.4) and undoubtedly more to come (like a fisheye or next M bodies) Canon have finally accelerated transition from crop-sensor mirrorslappers (xxxxD, xxxD, xxD, 7D - in that sequence) and EF-S mount to mirrorfree M/EF-M.

there is no reasonable doubt that EOS M line will be Canon's crop-sensor platform and in terms of unit sales their most important product line for many years to come.

btw: "no upgrade path" In form of "buying and using FF lenses on crop sensor cameras" is not important any longer in reality.

This is your individual opinion. Future will tell us if Canon sees it the same or different.

And what about speed? Speed in AF (EF-M motors) and speed in aperture.
I don't see high potentials here in the M system.
What do you think will be Canons future product for birders, wildlifers and sports prosumers and all others that do not have the money to go fully FF with big whites but also want the speed and reach you can get today with a 7D2 and EF 100-400II or EF400/5.6?

Again, there is no use in compact bodies when you are looking for FL 400mm+ or f/1.4 with >50mm and good IQ.

Then why is there the rumor mentioned above? And why are there already 9 pages and >160 posts about it? Lack of interest? No market? Strange!

Why?

There are many FUD-trolls here that really wish (not only think which is their opinion but wish!)for the EF/EF-S line to go extinct.

i think this is a misinterpretation. my postings that EF-S and EF are on their way out are a bit gleeful, because my earlier postings when i was wishing for mirrorfree alternatives received so much criticism, sarcasm and attempts to ridicule them.

now it turns out i was right all along and it's me waving goodbye to slapping mirrors and associated shenanigans. glad we finally are offered current day technology with enhanced functionality and capability also from ever-conservative Canon (and Nikon). glad to see they were finally pushed to "slaughter some of their formerly sacred cows" (change lens mount, omg!).

Waiting to see them further forced right into my ally: very compact gear with up-to-date IQ and functionality at much more affordable prices then hence.

For APS-C image circle Canon has managed this pretty well with M50 and EF-M lenses. Now i want to see a similar lineup for FF (in addition to all the super premium hi-end gear). i am confident i will eventually get my ultracompact, FF-sensored EOS "Rebel"/"R50" ... at € 999 and some matching nice and well-priced non-L RF lenses to go with it.

May be my posting was a little misinterpreted too because I did not meant you wished but you reminded me of someone's post who literally wished it. Which seems sick to me. That's why I mentioned in parenthesis that opinion is different from wish.

Since for me the EOS R is a step backwards I do not share your opinion but everyone is entitled to their opinion of course.
My reasons are that it seems obvious to me that EOS R is behind 5DIV and 5DsR and ahead of 6DII. This is now of course and Canon could improve in the future although the speed of EVFs cannot reach the speed of ... light of OVFs.