Lenses for the M series in 2020?

#21
Canon is trying to make the R as a stand alone and expensive system ( up to the long tele lens). then the M system becomes a small and reasonable priced system and expect people that like to have fast and long zoom to use Ef-EF-M adapter to complete the system. Personally, i thinks Canon has made a smart move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#22
elias723 said:
So
.. you want a telephoto for the M series with constant aperture or the constant aperture isnt very important for your use? I usually use the M50 in manual mode, so a constant aperture is very important to me
Click to expand...

I'm looking for fast primes in the small form factor. The largest entrance pupil so far in the small form factor is about 40mm with a 55mm filter. Assuming this maximum for the small form factor, some possible lenses would be about 40/1.0, 56/1.4, 80/2, 112/2.8, 160/4, and 224/5.6. Depends on where you draw the line for fast primes - I'd be interested in primes up to 2.8 in the small form factor.

While not impossible, I doubt Canon will create another lens series for EF-M with a larger form factor any time soon. So that leaves adapted EF lenses which I accept, ergo the 70-300L with an entrance pupil of 55mm and 67mm filters in my M kit and the occasional use of the EF 85, 100, and 135. A series of lenses in this form factor (55mm entrance pupil) could yield 55/1.0, 77/1.4, 110/2.0, 154/2.8, 220/4.0, and 308/5.6, but might not gain me a lot over my adapted EF glass. I view larger entrance pupils on native EF-M glass quite unlikely. Canon would prefer you to buy the R series.
 
Upvote 0
#23
the advantages of the shorter flange distance and smaller sensor are lost at larger focal lengths..those who want/need longer lenses for professional work are already using EF cameras and lenses and the enthusiats are adapting EF lenses
where the M line falls behind is the normal kit lenses area..15mm is perfect as a wide end but 45 AND at 6.3??? that's almost a bad joke...here i would see a lens like the EF-S 15-85 that is much smaller and lighter because of the shorter flange or a 15/16/17-55 2.8 which, again, would be smaller than the EF-S version

a 15-55 2.8 or a 15-70 4 i would buy immediately
a 15 to whatever longer than 85, maybe to replace the 18-150, even with 6.3 at the long end would also be nice
 
Upvote 0
#24
brad-man said:
You can fashion an adapter and bolt an M6 to the 200" Hale telescope at Mt Palomar Observatory. Doesn't make it part of the M system...
Click to expand...

I'm not exactly sure what that has to do with the fact EF glass is a clear great option for M-mount users, or the fact glass that is quality is going to be big and heavy anyway. I stand by the statement Canon have this worked out better than the punters think and the M-mount user base seems to be on board with what Canon would like us to do.

It seems maybe too well, given the issues with the EF adapter being continuously on backorder.

.those who want/need longer lenses for professional work are
Click to expand...

I use the M6 II for professional work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#25
andrei1989 said:
the advantages of the shorter flange distance and smaller sensor are lost at larger focal lengths..those who want/need longer lenses for professional work are already using EF cameras and lenses and the enthusiats are adapting EF lenses
where the M line falls behind is the normal kit lenses area..15mm is perfect as a wide end but 45 AND at 6.3??? that's almost a bad joke...here i would see a lens like the EF-S 15-85 that is much smaller and lighter because of the shorter flange or a 15/16/17-55 2.8 which, again, would be smaller than the EF-S version

a 15-55 2.8 or a 15-70 4 i would buy immediately
a 15 to whatever longer than 85, maybe to replace the 18-150, even with 6.3 at the long end would also be nice
Click to expand...
So is it unlikely that Canon will manufacture zoom with constant aperture for the M series?
 
Upvote 0
#26
Cat_Interceptor said:
*looks at the great adapter to EF glass*

*shrugs*

Honestly, I personallly could hardly care less and I suspect with the number of adapters they sell, most M6 II buyers I think are the same. Discusions that "small" is what the M line is supposed to have dont seem to wash that well esp when you have a number of M6 II owners here putting on big L glass teles and not caring for one second.
Click to expand...
So is it unlikely that Canon will manufacture zoom with constant aperture for the M series?
 
Upvote 0
#27
Cat_Interceptor said:
*looks at the great adapter to EF glass*

*shrugs*

Honestly, I personallly could hardly care less and I suspect with the number of adapters they sell, most M6 II buyers I think are the same. Discusions that "small" is what the M line is supposed to have dont seem to wash that well esp when you have a number of M6 II owners here putting on big L glass teles and not caring for one second.
Click to expand...
M6 II is in a "strange " situation, due to the 32 M sensor. It render the most of the M lenses become under powered,( may be except the 32 mm , 28 mm or the 22mm). So in order to get the most out of M6 II, people have to resort to the big L lenses. Something I cannot understand is that why canon sell the M6 II with 15-45mm lens as a kit ????
 
Upvote 0
#29
Rocky said:
M6 II is in a "strange " situation, due to the 32 M sensor. It render the most of the M lenses become under powered,( may be except the 32 mm , 28 mm or the 22mm). So in order to get the most out of M6 II, people have to resort to the big L lenses. Something I cannot understand is that why canon sell the M6 II with 15-45mm lens as a kit ????
Click to expand...

Cheap and gets you going. And to be honest you arent going to see the lens being overpowered taking kitty photos for Facebook.

TBH that 32MP sensor even gives L Glass a real workout and I've found using my 70-200L IS USM L v1 isnt good enough when pixel peeping. The 24-105 F4 L v1 is also barely an equal. That sensor really puts demands on lenses and I kinda wonder what it would be like in a RF body with RF glass.....
 
Upvote 0
#30
Cat_Interceptor said:
Cheap and gets you going. And to be honest you arent going to see the lens being overpowered taking kitty photos for Facebook.

TBH that 32MP sensor even gives L Glass a real workout and I've found using my 70-200L IS USM L v1 isnt good enough when pixel peeping. The 24-105 F4 L v1 is also barely an equal. That sensor really puts demands on lenses and I kinda wonder what it would be like in a RF body with RF glass.....
Click to expand...
What is the rational behind using the 32M sensor on M6 II?
 
Upvote 0
#32
Rocky said:
What is the rational behind using the 32M sensor on M6 II?
Click to expand...
Economies of scale and marketing. It's cheaper to use the same sensor in several cameras even if they have comparatively minor differences for specific application, and however smart we think we are the vast majority of consumers buy into the more is better. Look at the 1 series, no effective resolution increase for well over 10 years because that pro market are one of the few places that actually resist the more is better meme.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#33
I saw this patent on Canon watch and I think it will be a very attractive lens. preferably I would have liked it to be constant f / 4 but it still seems to be a good alternative.
At the end of the day, we know that many of the lenses that have been patented by Canon for the M series do not reach the market.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20200113-231114_Facebook.jpg
    Screenshot_20200113-231114_Facebook.jpg
    177.1 KB · Views: 232
Upvote 0
#34
With the M, Canon still seems to have one foot in the original target user (a Japanese Woman upgrading from P&S). Their lenses tend to match that philosophy too. Their latest bodies are more enthusiast oriented, but where are enthusiast lenses? I think they will keep requiring users to purchase EF lenses when they want high end lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#35
Mt Spokane Photography said:
With the M, Canon still seems to have one foot in the original target user (a Japanese Woman upgrading from P&S). Their lenses tend to match that philosophy too. Their latest bodies are more enthusiast oriented, but where are enthusiast lenses? I think they will keep requiring users to purchase EF lenses when they want high end lenses.
Click to expand...

So long as they insist on retaining the same physical diameter of the lens, they won't be able to do much for enthusiasts on the M mount.
 
Upvote 0
#38
I think the M6 Mark II is a game changer in the M series. Whether that changes anything about lens development or not is another matter. I tend to agree that higher performance will be left to the adapter and EF mount glass. I do think the Sigma EF-M mounts perform well (the 56 and 30 both of which I have). From Canon you have the 22,32 (which I've heard performs well), and the 11-22 does a pretty good job. On a daily basis I shoot the Sigmas, or adapted glass however. Few samples:

Sigma 56

i-kTGq4gx.jpg


Zeiss 135mm APO Sonar

i-zg2sqJQ-XL.jpg


11-22

i-MbwMxq7-XL.jpg



I really wish Zeiss would do something similar to their Touit line for the EF-M but I'm not holding my breath.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#39
dcm said:
Sometimes I wish I had kept the EF-S 55-250, but gave it away with my T2i a while back to someone just getting into photography. It would be my other choice for a telephoto zoom on the M series, as it's sharper and even cheaper than the EF-M.
Click to expand...
I just ordered an EF-S 55-250 STM after seeing reviews. I bought it used from National Camera in the Twin Cities. I will pick it up when the governor's order is lifted, presumably May 18. If you buy gear online, you can trust these guys. If they say a used lens is "excellent", it is. No financial interest, just a very happy customer. Anyway, when I get the EF-S 55-250 STM, I will test it against the EF-M 55-200 I have. The 100-400 L II I have shoots great on the M5, but I can't always be walking around with that beast.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#40
I shoot a Cannon 100-400mm L mkII on both a 7D and an M5. I like mirrorless. The 45mp sensor on the R5 would actually put fewer pixels in a distant subject with this lens than with the M5. I expect the M6 mkII sensor would outperform the R5 by even a greater degree for distant subjects. I have not yet tried panning race cars with the M5, but the old 7D has given great results.

Otherwise, I like the M5 for less-demanding distances with native lenses or maybe the EF-S 55-250 STM I have on order. The 32mm f1.4 is outstanding. The EF-M 55-200 has been more-disappointing. The goofy ELV on the M6 has been a deal-breaker for me.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
Is a non-L RF 70-200 f/2.8 or similar lens on the horizon?
Replies
31
Views
2K
plusnq
P
Canon Rumors
The next 2 VCM L prime lenses are scheduled for September
Replies
60
Views
6K
Slasheal
Slasheal
Canon Rumors
Are we finally going to get f/2.8 constant aperture zoom lenses for APS-C/RF-S?
Replies
122
Views
10K
PhilC
P
cayenne
Adapting lenses to the R52 (or any R system camera)....any experiences yet?
Replies
21
Views
2K
cayenne
cayenne
Canon Rumors
Launch schedule of SIGMA 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN | Contemporary for Canon RF Mount
Replies
33
Views
4K
neuroanatomist
neuroanatomist
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu