Lawrencew: A $299 launch price sounds a bit of a bargain for a UWA. That said, Canon's recent STM lenses like the 55-250mm have taken a long time to fall significantly in street price.
That's a pretty good starter line up now though from 10-250mm all IS and STM, if matches the decent (for their price) IQ of the 18-55 and 55-250 lenses.
It isn't clear how closely it matches, but the EF-M 11-22mm IS STM is an amazing lens, so that bodes well for the 10-18
It is also wider and cheaper than the 11-22mm by 25%.
DVT80111: Still nothing can compete with the Sigma 18-35/1.8
Well that is a 'normal' zoom, these are ultra wide angles and (for once) Sigma doesn't have anything as good.
These will both be awesome on E-Mount bodies, would definitely grab a 10-18mm for an a6000. 16-35mm might be of interest if the Zeiss isn't that great.
EDWARD ARTISTE: the 10-18 would be great on am eos M. heck, the existing 10-22 is well balanced on it.
IS? yes plesase. i wish the 22f2 had it
I agree with the above, hell I will probably be buying one to use on an a6000. Absolute bargain.
Impulses: Very aggressive pricing on that compact EF-S 10-18mm... The 10-22 is at least twice that much no? Is that like the cheapest UWA zoom around now?
@ srados - The current STM 18-55mm is actually pretty decent optically, though slow. The EF-M 18-55mm is also a very decent little lens and it's WA brother the 11-22mm @ $399 RRP was quite likely Canon's best UWA zoom, so there is nothing 'crap' about this lens, apart from.maybe the build.
Henrik Herranen: MTF for the EF-S 10-18:http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_s_10_18mm_f_4_5_5_6_is_stm
Are my eyes deceiving me or does the MTF look seriously impressive for a 300$ lens?
And although it was posted earlier, here's a reposted 16-35/4 IS link:http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_16_35mm_f_4l_is_usm
EF-M 11-22mm was already their best UWA zoom, so it is great to see they have an EF-S that is similar and slightly cheaper emerge.
Boss of Sony: In my experience, the overwhelming majority of people only use these UWA angle lenses at the extreme wide angle end (e.g. 10mm), and almost nobody uses them at the long end. Therefore, why doesn't the manufacturer just make a UWA prime (e.g. 10mm prime) and be done with it. It would be easier and cheaper to make, and would be faster and have better image quality.
Samyang make the small 12mm f2 for mirrorless. Personally I use the range as a useful PJ range. IS is handy as well.
There already is the 11-22mm EF-M with IS, better build, smaller etc
pew pew: looks like a great pocket camera, much better then the gx1 II for less $
Er how? With slow kit zoom it isn't in the same class. It is a typical mirrorless model with slow kit zoom. A NEX-3n from 2 years ago would be it's equal (minus WiFi).
JEROME NOLAS: Will somebody make a 24mm (36mm eqv.) f 1.8 (2.8) for APS-C DSLR instead? This is insane, it seems that all people are shooting at night or caring about the "creamy bokeh."
Sigma 18-35mm f1.8, easy. Plus you get 18mm f1.8 (28mm) and 35mm f1.8 lenses into the bargain without having to swap lenses. It is prime good and pretty cheap. DSLR manufacturers want to flog you FF lenses, the Sigma is a crop saviour.
Jogger: Interchangeable lenses for cameras with smaller than APSc sensors make no sense. You can get the upcoming Sony RX100m3 with 24-70/1.8-2.8 equiv. in a much smaller package.
And the XZ-2 / MX-1 is considerably bigger than the RX100...
I did prefer the feel of my MX-1 over the RX100 though.
@ Howaboutraw - and this Samsung has a faster lens does it? Their prime lens is two stops slower than the Sony with no IS... and a slow kit zoom. Fast 50mm is coming, but if rumours are true the Sony will be just as fast @ 50mm equiv.
Menneisyys: Given the miniscule size of the 24.3mm prime (and it being a cheap kit lens), pretty good IQ. Of course it's, in the corners (sharpness and CA) and WRT brightness, a far cry away from the Oly 12/2 but he latter is an order of magnitude more expensive and considerably bulkier.
Nevertheless, given that my (being just a vacation / walk / selfie / family shooter) fav FoV is 24mm and I very rarely go over it, the whole package seems to be very decent.
Or an EOS-M with 11-22mm, which is relatively inexpensive. Sony 16mm (which is a bit average, but rather cheap). Or my choice is the GR, not quite 24mm but astonishingly good and not terribly expensive (plus option of very decent 21mm for not a lot of money).
CanonKen: *checks RX100 price*
Very low ISO is good, but the camera with the 9-27mm is too big to be 'small', and not sure what I'd lose with a high-end P&S.
But you gain a faster and better ranging lens. Not 'everything' is about sensor. It seems to be out of favour to mention the RX100, but if you have a similar sensor bit get a much faster lens in a smaller package it's a bit hard to justify.
I have had a play with the NX mini with the 9mm prime... It's ok, but the screen isn't great, the controls are less than stellar and for a lens that is bigger than the built in lens on the compact (when retracted) it is awfully slow (aperture), in fact a full 2 stops slower than the RX100 AND has no IS.
On the plus side the 30mm f2 will make a decent little portrait lens and the 50mm equiv will round the set fairly well.
But the lack of viewfinder and fiddly controls mean a no for me. Could be interesting with the 55-200mm though which is quite inexpensive.
Eh, an EOS-M twin lens kit for $300 compares quite favourably to the T kit. Both well made (though the T obviously a little slicker), touch operation, crop sensor, higher quality kit zoom and good fast small 35mm equiv prime. Focus isn't super fast on either and both partly rely on using the brands legacy lenses. Oh and both have a WA (Leica's is coming). Both have some of the best in class lenses with a body that's a bit ho-hum.
Oh and one has a red dot.
Not a Leica basher, would love an M, but the T is an overpriced mirrorless with fancy packaging.
DaytonR: Interesting camera , it seems Sony is hell bent on removing GPS from its cameras - sad ....
Wow, honestly people will always find something to complain about. Want GPS and don't want any of the other new features... Buy an A77. Really, really simple.
Scottelly: They took away the GPS?!? WTF?!?
Though I am glad they have made a new, updated version of the A77, I can't understand Sony. I won't buy it without GPS. I will get the old one instead . . . or I'll get a Nikon D5300. I don't really need the speed shooting capability, and until I see that Sony is committed to this line of cameras by making three or four new, kick-ass lenses for them, I will stay away from their newest cameras. The mirrorless cameras don't have two of the features I have come to expect from Sony - in-camera image stabilization and GPS, and now Sony drops GPS from their newest A77! I think they dropped the ball too.
I was thinking Sony should make one of these without an anti-aliasing filter. Hopefully they will make an A79 with that and GPS . . . and a bigger buffer . . . and two memory card slots (fast ones - maybe UHS2).
I wonder how fast the memory card slot in this camera is.
Cool, so I guess you will buy the 'other' DSLR type cameras with IBIS and GPS then?
new boyz: I have no complaint about using pre flash as focus assist. When focus lamp is needed, you're doing flash photography anyway. Serves as red eye reduction mechanism as well.
You only need the assist beam when there isn't enough light to focus. Being that the new AF system can focus down to much lower light levels this is unlikely to be any difference between A77 with assist beam and A77 II without (except the advantage of not having to use the assist beam of course).
Richard Murdey: Is there a fundamental issue which means on-sensor PD is worse than the off-sensor variety? Otherwise you'd think SLT's days are somewhat numbered...
Yes. The sensors on a dedicated PDAF are much bigger and as such more accurate as well as being more sensitive. There is a reason why on sensor PDAF shuts off at certain light levels. Also those cameras use CDAF for focus, the PDAF are 'assist' points. For a camera with PDAF lenses these are not enough. The 70D with all it's PDAF points doesn't really perform better than the original A77, which had very average (and near lowest in class) dedicated PDAF. Though the extra spread of the 70D OSPDAF does have some advantages.
Banhmi: I'm pretty irked that they reduced features from the original a77.
Specifically, I actually really LIKE GPS now, even though I originally thought it was pointless.
The A77 didn't have a metering switch either. Not since A700 and A850/900.