Previous news story    Next news story

Just posted: Our Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM preview

By dpreview staff on Jun 6, 2013 at 04:00 GMT

Just posted: Our hands-on preview of the Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM. Canon's third lens for its EOS M mirrorless camera is its first image-stabilized wideangle zoom, and first with a collapsible barrel design. With an 18-35mm equivalent angle of view and silent STM focusing, it could be an interesting option for photographers wanting the wider view but looking to travel light. Click below to read our preview.

Click here for our preview of the Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM
36
I own it
12
I want it
2
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 80
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (10 months ago)

Wow, F5.6 at a 35mm focal length. That is fricking fast for a lens these days, right?

Zank you veddy much, Canon-san. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

0 upvotes
fikcyjny
By fikcyjny (10 months ago)

funny, too big for such body

Olympus 9-18mm f/4-5.6 for micro43 looks much better and smaller

0 upvotes
kodachromeguy
By kodachromeguy (10 months ago)

The EOS-M has a larger sensor than micro 4/3, so the lens must cover a larger surface area. But I agree that the 9-18 mm is an attractive package.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

EF-M 11-22 is slightly lighter in weight than Oly 9-18,
if the weights are weighted by sensor area ratio.

(EF-M / Canon APS-C) < (m.Zuiko / 4/3" sensor area)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
T3
By T3 (10 months ago)

Kinda sick of this "too big for such a body" nonsense. In the DSLR world, we regularly use huge lenses that make even larger DSLR bodies seem small. And yet, no one ever complains "funny, too big for such a body!"

You also have to keep in mind that sometimes it's nice to have a larger lens that's easier to grab and turn its zoom/focus rings. The Oly 9-18 f/4-5.6 is a rather tiny lens, and not quite so comfortable to use as something a bit larger.

2 upvotes
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (10 months ago)

Good. Now Canon, how about 1. getting back SERIOUSLY in the (still photo) sensor business (= throwing all others in the stone age, I mean like it was before Sony spent a fortune helping Nikon DSLRs and their own photo division) and 2. putting a killer AF (vs the mirrorless stablemates and not DSLRs, just to obviously avoid "cannibalization") in a "less-than-DSLR" camera? Think you will get a system that will sell like peanuts... Cheers! :)

3 upvotes
Revimaru
By Revimaru (10 months ago)

A rumor site recently posted a canon patent describing a Foveon-like image sensor. Let's hope for the best.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

but there is no hope in Foveon. not yet.

0 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (10 months ago)

FINALLY!
I have always whined that travel/hiking is when compactness of EVILs shine, but there are no sensible ultra wide lens options...
Oly 9-18 has only passable optics...
Panny 7-14 has decent optics, but "kit lens" build quality with a ridiculous price

Canon sensors sucks, but they still produce great glass! Glad to see this lens come!

I still think that a ~10mm F4ish pancake prime lens would be the ultimate travel lens, but then i think it will never come.

1 upvote
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (10 months ago)

You probably wouldn't consider a Nikon 1, though outdoors they are great fun to shoot with because of the super fast pdaf, and the image quality is decent, if not great. What is on offer is a superb wa zoom, the 6.7-13mm (18-35mm equiv.). Great build quality, first rate optics, decent price. They even give you a hood (no Oly gouging). All the recent CX lenses have been excellent.

2 upvotes
iShootWideOpen
By iShootWideOpen (10 months ago)

Amazing lens for amazing price. I have the EOS M with both lenses. The 22mm F/2 smokes the Fuji 23mm on the X100 and easily beats the Zeiss 24 1.8 for the NEX.
Also the difference between the Canon EFM 18-55 and the mid range zooms from Sony is night and day.
I'm pretty sure, based on current EFM optics, the 11-22 will be stellar!
Suddenly the EOS M with the enhanced AF and the addition of what should be a stellar ultra wide is looking like an amazing bargain.

4 upvotes
j3rrykil
By j3rrykil (10 months ago)

tell me about this enhanced AF

2 upvotes
zapatista
By zapatista (10 months ago)

Agreed on the 22mm, and you can buy a new one for around $100 on eBay.

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

Agreed. I paid $330 for my kit with 18-55 and 22 plus 90ex - An absolute bargain! Both lenses are fantastic, where I instantly ditch the kit lenses on anything else! I will be buying this, I have been converted! The 22 is way better than my X100 (handling isn't as good, AF is about the same).

The 22 alone was enough reason for me to buy the cheap little M, but I will stay for the 11-22

1 upvote
digifan
By digifan (10 months ago)

Then you probably never owned Olympus lenses for m(43). I'd wager the 11-22 will not best the Olympus 9-18 or the Panasonic 7-14. Even the improved AF can't hold a candle to Oly and Pany.
Also I don't see the 22 smoking the 24 Zeiss on NEX. Guess you haven't woken up yet.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

@digifan,

it looks that EF-M is much better than 4/3" ones on paper.

EF-M 22/2 is way sharper than Sony NEX 24/1.8 at open and stopped down, except extreme corners at open which comes from the pancake design that makes the lens much smaller.

0 upvotes
Jeremy
By Jeremy (10 months ago)

Thanks Canon, especially at $400 bucks!

I use the EOS-M + EF-S 10-22 for travel along with the 22 - it's a little bulky but fits in a non-camera bag better than anything with a mirror hump. The performance rocked, so I hope the rocking continues.

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (10 months ago)

I'm a dedicated M43 user but this lens, at this price, impresses. Similar NEX and M43 offerings are a lot more expensive. I just hope the IQ doesn't reflect the price!

7 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (10 months ago)

Considering the EOS M body offering is pretty weak, I wouldn't get too jealous yet.

3 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

How much better are they? I have a NEX-5n and I would say there is bugger-all difference, AF isn't even that different.

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

> EOS M body offering is pretty weak

weak in general, not many dedicated lenses, slow AF,
but the focus speed is not an issue for superwides.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

I don't mind the AF actually. I have used much worse to be honest. It also 'locks' better than my NEX or Pen, rather than hunting back and forth as much (though the Pen does the hunting very very quickly). It is a bit like 'slow and steady winning the race' kind of feel. The Pen is manic and fast, the M slow but kinda goes straight to the right spot (the PDAF at work there), but more slowly.

1 upvote
digifan
By digifan (10 months ago)

@abortabort, you must be using a very old Pen if you think EOS-M is faster and better locking, since all modern Pen's smoke the EOS M in the area of AF. I mean E-PL3, E-PM1, E-P3, E-PM2, E-PL5, E-P5 and the OM-D, then I haven't gotten aroud to the Panasonic offerings yet.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
1 upvote
T3
By T3 (10 months ago)

@tkbslc - "Considering the EOS M body offering is pretty weak..."

Camera bodies come and go. They are the least permanent part of any system. Lenses, on the other hand, are what you tend to keep over time, as you upgrade bodies from generation to generation, model to model.

0 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (10 months ago)

If you want ultra wide and large aperture, the only good way to go is 135 format full frame. This new 11-22mm plays to the strengths of a compact mirrorless body. Way to go Canon. The 22mm f/2 will nicely cover those looking for larger aperture at 22mm. Canon knows how to do this after-all. A better body isn't so difficult.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (10 months ago)

Loving the prices of EOS-M recently...AF speed increase via firmware is killer news. Roll-out makes sense...they have not hit telephoto zooms or short telephoto primes much yet because that is where you are truly wanting for fast AF and EVF. Wide angle is exactly where getting rid of the mirror makes the most sense anyhow. Sharper than the APS-C version means the optics are good. Sony's 10-18 gets pretty lousy marks yet again on photozone (they are giving the Sony a big handicap by measuring the better of the two decentered sides and it still doesn't impress). In fact I dare say sharper than APS-C UWA means its competitive if not possibly better than the 17-40L on FF....especially with that IS!

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

in theory, APS-C mirrorless mounts, NEX, XF, and EOS-M have good advantage over SLR mounts in that they have much shorter flange-back, less than 30mm equiv. than over 40mm.

0 upvotes
SunnyFlorida
By SunnyFlorida (10 months ago)

Canon guys shouldn't complain, at least you have a legit battle proven sensor , Nikon is using a 3rd party 1" sensor which is 4x smaller , lacks DoF control, has horrible noise after ISO 400 and oh yeaah Nikon charges a lot more for their mirror-less set up, and don't even get me started on the lenses, their w/a equivalent is priced 20% higher than this one from Canon,...that's right 20% higher price for a lens that only has to cover 1/4 of the imaging circle of an aps-c sensor.

5 upvotes
matty_boy
By matty_boy (10 months ago)

I think its also worth pointing out that, at the last count, Nikon was selling twice as many of these terrible things than all other mirror less cameras put together. Surely life is too short to worry about this sort of thing.. The Nikon 1 series are not for me, as im sure they are not for many others including you, but clearly there is a large market out there wanting this sort of thing. I know plenty of guys bought these, they seem well made as they arent returned often and id argue about horrible noise above ISO 400. Id say they are pretty impressive for the sensor size. What is this obsession people have with DoF control as well

2 upvotes
SunnyFlorida
By SunnyFlorida (10 months ago)

@Matt_boy: You're higher than a kite, please eprovide a credible link stating that the 1" series are outselling all other cameras combineed or check yourself into rehab

6 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (10 months ago)

I'll take the N1 system. Yes, the smaller N1 sensor can't match larger sensors, but it isn't that bad. At least Nikon lets some noise show rather than smearing it away. AF is nearly instant as well. Nikon also has a good lineup of lenses for it despite the system being less than two years old.

Big sensors mean big lenses. This lens is huge compared to even my 30-110 CX telezoom.

Nothing against the EOS-M. I wanted a small interchangeable camera system and Nikon delivered.

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (10 months ago)

(Canon user here): At least the Nikon 1 system got DSLR operational performance right. I do wish the sensor was better, but honestly for most day-to-day family photography I think low shutter lag and fast AF is at least as important as high ISO noise.

And the ISO 400 thing is not true. You can do pretty decent ISO 1600 on a Nikon 1. Sure it looks like ISO 6400 on Canon APS-C, but it's still not as bad as you suggest.

5 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (10 months ago)

I have no qualms about using my V1 up to ISO 800, and 1600 is usable, if starting to show more noise. Luckily, the noise at those levels is generally benign, fine-grained luminance noise that reduces detail but doesn't jump out at you like sparkly chroma noise. For a camera with small, affordable lenses and incredible speed in decent light, that kind of noise I can easily live with.

Aptina, which makes the sensor, brings a lot of interesting technology to them. Much of the image processing happens right on the sensor, contributing to the great speed of these cameras. The V2 can shoot 15 fps bursts with af working. 60 fps without af. The electronic shutter option allows silent shooting with absolutely no penalties (no rolling shutter). Likewise, video has no rolling shutter effects. That's down to the Aptina sensor technology. The next gen Aptina sensor can manage 4k video. Will we see that in a V3? Wouldn't surprise me.

2 upvotes
h2k
By h2k (10 months ago)

It's nice to see a wide-angle released *stabilised*.

8 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (10 months ago)

Even 1DX users don't have it!

0 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (10 months ago)

Indeed, this is a pleasant surprise.

1 upvote
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (10 months ago)

Not to repeat myself, but this is also true of the Nikon 16.7-13mm. It works very well. Not as vital as with the longer lenses, but it still helps.

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

Yeah everyone else does it... But it is nice to see Canon do one as well, usually they are such lame 'stick in the muds' wanting to 'hold back' features for a future release.

1 upvote
rgarijo
By rgarijo (10 months ago)

To all people making fun of the EOS-M...do you have one? or are you repeating what some photography gurus are saying in the internets.
It is an excellent camera, much better that what 90% of amateur users need. Great IQ, better than what m4/3 can deliver. AF is bad for moving objects (just like ANY other CSC system, even Nikon1 is only good in daylight), and usable for any other situation, faster AF than compact cameras, and I see millions of photographers using them daily.
The 22mm lens is excellent and only costs 190€, this 11-22mm lens is cheaper than the OLympus 9-18, half the price of the Sony 10-18, and cheaper than the Nikon1 6.7-13. Well done Canon. In three years Canon will be leader in DSRL and CSC markets.

10 upvotes
Dames01
By Dames01 (10 months ago)

I bought the EOS-M a couple of month ago and fully agree with your assessment.

Canon is planning a firmware update to be released at the end of June 2013. "Version 2 promises to boost the AF speed, making One Shot AF up to 2.3x faster when using FlexiZone Multi AF and the EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM lens. "

http://www.photographyblog.com/

Comment edited 60 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

I have one and it was a steal. The lenses thus far have been excellent and well priced. I see nothing really wrong with this system and I don't even like Canon.

I currently own and shoot:

Sony Alpha
Canon EOS
Sony NEX
m43's Olympus and Panasonic
Fuji X100
RX100

So I have a thing or two to compare it to ;) Only mirrorless system I haven't owned is Nikon 1 and if their 32mm hadn't been stupidly expensive I would have aV1 as well.

4 upvotes
vlad2304
By vlad2304 (10 months ago)

Absolutely agree with you.
I bought EOS M a month ago, took it to my trip to China and the pictures it produced are excellent.
If you care about IQ and not milliseconds difference in AF speed it is a great small camera rivaling Canon 7D.
I bought it as double kit and both lenses are just great.

1 upvote
Chez Wimpy
By Chez Wimpy (10 months ago)

>Great IQ, better than what m4/3 can deliver

Well that's odd... I have the 550D with the 18MP Canon sensor, yet my EM5 runs rings around it for IQ whenever DR is challenging and PPing comes into play. Did Canon go and fix the shadow pattern noise on their mirrorless implementation?

6 upvotes
rgarijo
By rgarijo (10 months ago)

The EM5 sensor is excellent, and a great improvement over the Panasonic sensor in previous m4/3 models ( I have an E-P3). I don't know if the EOS-M sensor is exactly the same as the one in the 550D, but I only have shadow banding if I push shadow more than 2 stops, which is fair enough for me. Sony sensors are truly excellent pushing shadows and the dynamic range is very good at base ISO, but I wouldn't say the EM5 run circles around Canons. In other areas, the M is better, in my opinion. I think colors are better, detail is better preserved, and I prefer the noise pattern of Canon at high ISO, etc...
Anyway, we are comparing a new sensor with a 4 year old sensor. As technology advances, Canon will have an edge over m4/3

2 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (10 months ago)

the EM-5 running circles around a 550D.. yeah sure... but only if your blind or lying with a purpose.

even pixelpeeper who think they are such experts have a hard time making out a difference between a 1100D and a EM-5 on A3 prints.
tested here in a german print magazine.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Houseqatz
By Houseqatz (10 months ago)

what kind of monitor is being used for comparison?

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

Most modern sensors are perfectly fine! The OM-D brigade like to shout from the rooftops about how awesome theirs is, mostly because what they have had to put up with for the last half decade was pretty woeful! It might be light years ahead of what they had before (well it isn't really but they see it as such) but it is only just getting into the oldest APS-C territory on the market.

0 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (10 months ago)

This lens is crazy slow.

Primes are the way to go for mirrorless systems: Olympus 12mm f/2 is the wide angle of choice.

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

This is an UWA. f2.8 is the fastest you'll get in this category usually for a prime (Zeiss or Fuji). In mirrorless f4 is the fastest for a zoom (Pana 7-14mm and Sony 10-18mm) so only 1 stop behind on the long end. Olympus, Samsung and Nikon's UWA's are just as slow, but this is stabilised and cheaper than all of them. I don't like Canon, but there is nothing wrong with this lens.

5 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (10 months ago)

@abortabort
tokina 11-16 f/2.8
sigma 10-20 f/3.5
canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
nikon 10-24 f/3.5-4.5
tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5
tokina 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5

0 upvotes
HSway
By HSway (10 months ago)

@Mike
To get this MFT needs 9-18/f3.2-4.5 lens. I concur the Olympus in-body latest stabilization is great when you need smaller apertures and larger DOF for landscape type of photos and similar use (not everyone is a street shooter). But I am still thinking the fitted uwa (or telephoto)-specific IS could give very good results. And there is the 22/2 where the speed makes more sense.

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

@ZAnton - None of those are mirrorless lenses. I use my Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 on my NEX but that thing is HUGE on there and completely defeats the purpose of mirrorless.

Some people seem to want mirrorless to be everything that DSLRs are, just not a DSLR. I want MILC to be genuinely small. This lens fits that bill perfectly.

Oh and not one of those listed are stabilised.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (10 months ago)

Ultrawide zooms are often given slower apertures because ultrawide shots involve deep DOF and scenery more often than not.

12mm f2 is not really in the same league at 24mm equivalent. This starts at 18mm equivalent, or like a 9mm on m4/3.

0 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (10 months ago)

The Nikon 1 6.7-13mm runs from f/3.5-5.6. Not a big difference, but nice if it's what you have.

0 upvotes
HSway
By HSway (10 months ago)

If it’s as good as the ef-m 18-55 (and 22/2) it’s a great addition. I see the stabilized uw-wa lens an Excellent move for this. The lens I’d be personally looking for most though is a 35-40 mil fast compact lens. The excellent ef 40 pancake is not a direct design. And yes the camera to be taken seriously needs something to look through.

2 upvotes
007peter
By 007peter (10 months ago)

* WOW * color me impressed. I admit that I make fun of EOS-M, but this lens, alone is making me reconsider my opinions about EOS-M

1. AF Speed isn't critical when it shoot WIDE ANGLE landscape. Unlike telephoto, your subject will be stationary buildings instead of a moving person. 11-22mm STM strengthen the argument for EOS-M.

2. Massive Price drop from $799 to around $400 + 22mm STM kit makes it hard to resist.

I can buy a single Panasonic 20mm/1.7 lens for my M43, but it would cost me around $350. Yet, for just $75 ~ $100 more, I can pickup an EOS-M + 22mm STM lens.

When I had my Canon DSLR, I refuse to buy the 10-22mm because it doesn't have an IS. Now that canon has one with IS....and in such a tiny package..... I'm really excited about this lens.

EOS-M + 11-22mm STM would make a great single traveling lens. It may be the only lens I need for traveling.

3 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (10 months ago)

Just buy NEX. Sony got exactly the same lens for E-mount. Only they got by far better sensors.

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (10 months ago)

If you are ok with f/5.6 zooms, you should just pick up a Sony RX-100.

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

@ Mike00000 - Erm RX100 is not UWA. End of story. I have both and would happily pay $400 for an IS UWA for the M.

@ Plastik - Same lens for E-Mount, yeah for about $800, so twice the price.

I bought an EOS-M with 18-55mm + 22mm f2 for the price of a Panasonic 20mm on it's own (under $350). That plus $400 for this UWA would make it $750. For an equivalent NEX system, even including my uber cheap NEX-5n that cost me $180 for body only, add the Zeiss 24mm to give me a fast 35mm equiv that's like $1000+, then add the HUGE $800 UWA = $1980 and my M has a kit lens. Yeah that maybe half a stop over the Canon the Sony has would be totally worth it ;)

5 upvotes
InTheMist
By InTheMist (10 months ago)

I'll never make fun of the EOS-M!

I'm a Nikon guy, I make fun of the V1 ;)

5 upvotes
peeder
By peeder (10 months ago)

I think the biggest shame is, for all its video features (STM, dynamic IS), it doesn't have fixed aperture zoom.

I suppose they could correct for that electronically but then you have varying noise floor in your shot.

Of course filmmakers generally dislike zooming in realtime which is more of an ENG thing.

And Canon doesn't have a mirrorless camera that's serious for video yet and probably doesn't want to make one, as it's more strategic for them to continue to establish the full frame (135) EF mount as an industry standard. A mirrorless mount makes it easier to adapt other lens formats such as PL. It's also nice to use the flange area normally occupied by the mirror for ND and IR filters as the Cx00 series do.

This is probably a good lens though, and Canon may have a worthy competitor to the m43 and NEX cams in the portable-enthusiast space, someday. It seems half-hearted right now, a hedge in case demand moves that way.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (10 months ago)

The EOS M is sadly in "No Man's Land" right now...

It has the same fate as the Nikon "1" system.

Both Canon and Nikon have just over saturated the Market Segment and they have just sailed right into the Sargaso Sea.

.

8 upvotes
LuckyEight
By LuckyEight (10 months ago)

It has the same fate as the Nikon 1 system? Really? I am not a fan of this system either, but it seems that Nikon 1 is selling good. You can not say that about EOS M.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Plastek
By Plastek (10 months ago)

Selling good? Where? Comparing to what? lol How clueless one has to be to buy Nikon 1?

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
1 upvote
_sem_
By _sem_ (10 months ago)

Both have started to sell better since the entry price has fallen under that of top compact cameras with the clearance sales. But the original idea of the mirrorless seems to have been to squeeze more money out of shoppers, not less :)

> How clueless one has to be to buy Nikon 1?
V1 kits were remarkable value for money recently. But I still wouldn't buy one personally because I find it too big (with lens) to replace a compact and not good enough to serve as the main (travel) camera.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
PeterTom
By PeterTom (10 months ago)

The same fate?

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50562689

Nikon 1 J1 rank 1
EOS M rank 15 with more than five times less "Sales share".

I know, it's Japan only. But both companies in your "comparison" are Japanese, so why not look at their domestic market share?

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (10 months ago)

Nikon is #4 in the mirrorless ILC market, in terms of global market share. Olympus, Panasonic and Sony have larger market shares, but Nikon is way ahead of Fuji, Canon, Samsung and Pentax, which are all still niche players with single digit market shares.
Don't forget that the majority of camera buyers in the consumer segment are not enthusiasts, gearheads and tech nerds; they're just regular people who want something better than their smartphone. They aren't aware of things like sensor size and other technical details.
In a world where most people are content with using their smartphone as their only camera, is it really so hard to believe that Nikon 1 can sell better than more capable cameras?

0 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (10 months ago)

I bought a V1 at fire sale prices and don't regret it a bit. In absolute image quality, it can't compete, but it's better than compacts, faster than the competition outdoors (where I use it), and has an ever-increasing selection of very good Nikon lenses, mostly attractively priced. Yes, this new Canon wa zoom is cheaper than the Nikon equivalent, but they are both much cheaper than MFT and NEX equivalents. Whether the Canon is a good lens optically remains to be seen. The Nikon is excellent, small, and beautifully made.

0 upvotes
Treeshade
By Treeshade (10 months ago)

The only reason to use EOS-M is its compatibility with Canon lens, great as a second body for Canon DSLR users. Now why would Canon users buy a lens that cannot fit the DSLRs when there are wideangle zooms that fit both? I guess it is valid as a smaller lighter traveling combo.But still there are better choices.

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

This one has IS, the EF-S version doesn't and costs a bomb more.

0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (10 months ago)

Canon needs a new body to compete with m4/3...

4 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (10 months ago)

And with NEX. But to do that, Canon needs to take mirrorless seriously, build an EVF into the body and significantly improve AF.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
Dames01
By Dames01 (10 months ago)

Well, the announcement mentions that the lens will be accompanied by a firmware update which will among other things improve the AF speed...

1 upvote
b534202
By b534202 (10 months ago)

Does Canon even have any up-to-date EVF tech to use on a mirrorless? I think that is partly why they didn't put one in.
They have that EVF in SX50 which is 200k dots, while Olympus is at 10 times that at > 2million ...

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

Yeah they do in their pro cameras with EVF such as C300.

0 upvotes
b534202
By b534202 (10 months ago)

Ah okay, so they're not THAT far down ...

0 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (10 months ago)

Isn't this lens a bit too long for a UWA for a mirrorless camera (shorter flange distance and all that)?

2 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (10 months ago)

It's only 2.3" long. .4" longer than the tiny 9-18mm Olympus. Seems pretty small to me.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (10 months ago)

Erm, looks pretty tiny to me. Wanna compare to Sony's 10-18mm?

0 upvotes
photonius
By photonius (10 months ago)

Even though the EOS-M has a much shorter flange distance, ALL mirror-less systems have a flange distance around 20mm (except Pentax Q), which is double the distance for UWAs (around 10mm), so you still need a retrofocus design. And in any lens design, the lens elements take up space, so the retrofocus elements will take up a bit of space before you even come to the part of the lens that needs to collect the light at wide angle at the front. Further, no matter how short the flange distance, the fact is that due sensor design (and the microlenses on it), you cannot have light come in at extremely shallow angles, otherwise the light at the edges will just be lost. So, it seems the rear element is usually not closer than about 20mm to the sensor. That's why there is no 10mm pancake. Theoretically (thin lens), a 10mm lens would only be 10mm away from the sensor, and have a diameter of 10mm for f1.0! The only way to go smaller is with smaller sensors (Nikon, Pentax Q)

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Total comments: 80