Japan Patent Application 2018185386 showcases an optical formula for an EF-M 10mm f/2.8 Fisheye lens. The short backfocus distance tells us it's for a mirrorless application, and we're pretty sure there will NOT be dedicated APS-C lenses for the EOS R system.
Is a fisheye needed for the EOS M lineup? Probably not, but if priced right, it could be a solid niche lens for the system.
Frank
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. :rolleyes::D
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 :-)
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
AF isn't very important in a fish-eye lens anyway.
Please let a f/4.0 10mm IS rectilinear lens follow!
To me it's the opposite. To me EOS M is the pure consumer line, the "keep it small line".
Reasons:
Not "sorry", but to me it makes totally sense that there will be an APS-C EOS R line for prosumer/enthusiast/birders/etc.
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.
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?
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.
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.