Previous page Next page

Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Preview

June 2013 | By Andy Westlake

Preview based on a pre-production Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM

It's now almost a year since Canon unveiled its first foray into the mirrorless camera sector, the EOS M. The camera was launched with two lenses, the EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM kit zoom and the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM 'pancake' prime. But while most other manufactures have gone out of their way to provide 'roadmaps' of upcoming lens releases in an attempt to convince potential buyers of their commitment to these new systems, Canon has remained stubbornly quiet. But now EOS M owners have a new lens to consider: the EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM wideangle zoom. Note though that the lens hasn't been officially released in the USA, and we have no indication whether it will ever be sold in this market.

The lens offers a zoom range equivalent to 18-36mm on full frame, which is a little less ambitious than its closest competitor, the Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS (15-24mm equiv). To an extent this is a trade-off for its relatively compact design; it uses a retracting barrel reminiscent of the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6, and is about the same size as the 18-55mm kit zoom. This means it's much smaller than Canon's EF-S 10-22mm f/4-5.6 USM wideangle zoom for its APS-C SLRs. One oddity is a 55mm filter size that's not shared with any of Canon's other current lenses.

The 11-22mm is Canon's first wide zoom with image stabilisation, which the company claims will allow shooting at shutter speeds three stops slower than usual without the image being degraded by blurring from camera shake. It also includes Canon's 'Dynamic IS', which offers a wider range of correction during movie shooting. Focusing - both auto and manual - is handled by a linear stepper motor, which promises silent operation during movie recording.

Canon is making grand claims for the 11-22mm's optical quality, and saying that its 12 element / 9 group design will offer significantly better image quality than the (already well-regarded) EF-S 10-22mm. The lens we used to prepare this preview wasn't sufficiently finalised for Canon to allow us to shoot sample images, but we'll look at how well it performs just as soon as we can. Until then, read on to find out more about the lens's design and operation.

Headline features

  • 11-22mm focal length range (18-35mm equivalent)
  • F4-5.6 maximum aperture
  • Optical IS - 3 stops claimed benefit
  • Stepper motor for silent focusing in video
  • Collapsible barrel design

Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM specifications

Recommended retail price  • UK: £379.99
 • EU: €399
 • US: n/a
 Maximum format size  APS-C
 Focal length  11-22mm
 35mm equivalent focal length (APS-C)  18-35mm
 Diagonal angle of view  102.1° - 63.3°
 Maximum aperture  F4-5.6
 Minimum aperture  F22-35
 Lens Construction  • 12 elements in 9 groups
 • 2 aspheric elements
 Number of diaphragm blades  7
 Minimum focus  0.15m / 0.49ft
 Maximum magnification  0.30x
 AF motor type  • Linear stepper motor
 • Full time manual focus
 Focus method  Internal
 Zoom method  Rotary, extending barrel
 Image stabilization  • Yes
 • 3 stops
 Filter thread  • 55mm
 • Does not rotate on focus
 Supplied accessories*  • Front and rear caps
 Optional accessories  • Lens hood EW-60E
 • Lens pouch LP814
 Weight  220g (7.8 oz)
 Dimensions  61mm diameter x 58mm length
 (2.4 x 2.3 in)
 Lens Mount  Canon EF-M

* Supplied accessories may differ in each country or area


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2013 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
59
I own it
12
I want it
2
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 83
Karroly
By Karroly (11 months ago)

I am afraid IS on an ultra wide lens is just a sales gimmick. This lens is equivalent to a 18-35mm FF zoom. Thus it means one can shoot handheld at about 1/20s at 11mm and about 1/40s at 22mm. With the 3-stop advantage of the IS, it means speed can drop as low as about 1/2s - 1/3s at 11mm and 1/5s at 22mm. What kind of subjects can we shoot at such a low speed apart from paintings on a museum wall, where flashes are forbidden, or a landscape under moonlight without a tripod ? Personally, I found that shooting people indoor at speed below 1/30s, thanks to the OIS, generally produces blurred people in front of a sharp background, so I avoid it. Not to mention that ultra wide angle lenses distort people faces. I am rather looking for fast lenses and cameras with good IQ at high ISO for that purpose...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (11 months ago)

I use mine for interiors with natural light, night scenes, sunsets, overcast days, etc. Not just where flash is forbidden but where it would result in nasty reflections. It's incredibly handy, as is my Nikon 16-35VR. Neither of these wide lenses is suitable for people's faces but why would anybody try this?

6 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (11 months ago)

abrasiveREducer beat me to it. There are plenty of interiour shooters who will welcome the IS. Even at ISO800, a natural light shot on a cloudy day in a darker room requires a tripod.

2 upvotes
JimH
By JimH (11 months ago)

Yes. The above two posters beat me to this, but let me also chime in.

I often wish for IS in a wide angle lens.

For me, IS means NOT needing to lug and set up a tripod. Tripods limit one's ability to find and test various points of view quickly. Often, a photographer "settles" for a shooting position because the tripod is such a pain to move again. Sunsets, for example, are fleeting! Time is of the essence.

The precise point of view is extremely important, especially with a wide lens, because you're playing off foreground objects against the background (as in landscapes, interiors, and city scenes). If your ability to move about and shoot from various positions is slowed by a tripod, you miss finding some of those really great points of view and perspectives.

IS gives us the freedom to move and explore shooting positions unencumbered by a tripod. And often we wish to shoot at small apertures to get the most DOF. Again, IS frees us to do this handheld.

Bring on the IS wides!

2 upvotes
T3
By T3 (6 months ago)

This may come as a shock to you, but plenty of people use ultra wides on tripods, too. Is that a gimmick? Nope. The fact is, anything that can enhance stability can help image sharpness.

Secondly, regarding your comment about ultra wide angle lenses distorting people's faces...maybe that's why we generally don't use ultra wides for portraiture. Duh! LOL. Sounds like you're making some really foolish and pointless comments.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 17, 2013)

A guess would be this lens will be "introduced" in the USA with the next EOS M camera. Not sure why they would do it this way but it must be fun to see the free publicity.

0 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (Jul 23, 2013)

Perhaps Canon USA plan to sell this lens primarily as a kit with the new M.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 23, 2013)

Seems too wide to be offered as a kit lens.

1 upvote
Franz Kerschbaum
By Franz Kerschbaum (Jul 14, 2013)

Just got the e-mail from amazon.de that I will receive my 11-22 on Wednesday! Hurray!!!! Guess what, we have Robbie Williams tickets for Wednesday evening and on the ticket it says: "professional cameras not allowed". Perfect for my new little "m" looking as harmless as it gets... ;)

1 upvote
iShootWideOpen
By iShootWideOpen (Jun 26, 2013)

Why isn't this lens available for the US market?

0 upvotes
Jun2
By Jun2 (Aug 23, 2013)

Europeans are willing to pay more. So they get the lens first.

Comment edited 9 seconds after posting
1 upvote
dwill23
By dwill23 (Jun 13, 2013)

Thanks DPREVIEW... how about you review the amazing camera that goes along with it? The AF is the same as a point and shoot 5-8 years ago... slow.

When it goes get a lock ~.5 - 2.0 seconds it's extremely accurate.

Yes, sometimes it cannot get a lock, but same goes for even current point and shoots which focus the same way- in very dark scenes.

The image quality is AWESOME!! I believe it has the largest sensor for a mirrorless, and it really shows, especially when you add your pro glass to it.

I was out shooting with my 70-200 F4 L IS USM (far sharper than older f2.8 versions even stopped down to f4) with a 2x teleconverter and it was focusing at F8 without issue. I only have a 2x teleconverter because my 5D mark III was just updated to be able to shoot at F8, so i picked it up to go with my 70-200 f4 L.

The EOS M is fantastic. My ONLY complaint is when u hand it to someone else to take a pic and it doesn't focus as fast as they would expect.

2 upvotes
Mark Alan Thomas
By Mark Alan Thomas (Jun 17, 2013)

Sony and Leica have full frame mirrorless cameras.

0 upvotes
Rob P
By Rob P (Jun 18, 2013)

It's nitpicking, but Canon's APS-C sensor (1.6x crop) is slightly smaller than Fuji, Sony and Samsung's (among others) APS-C sensors (1.5x crop).

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 25, 2013)

The above are all useful comparisons. And when the Leica gets down to $300 including lens and the Sony gets interchangeable lenses it's going to be a real horse race.

1 upvote
JimH
By JimH (11 months ago)

I realize the post I'm replying to was made three months ago. Still, it's worth pointing out that the new firmware for the "M" makes the autofocus darned fast now.

0 upvotes
KariIceland
By KariIceland (11 months ago)

@JimH
Well actually Jim it does really do a TERRIBLE job still, look at digital rev and they're comparison video on youtube on the autofocus systems, the M is 4x slower than ANY of the competition.

0 upvotes
JimH
By JimH (2 months ago)

9 more months have gone by, and...

For a bit less than $300 for the camera and kit lens, the M has been incredible. I've gotten a LOT of good out of it.

The AF works a lot better with the new firmware.

But, it's harder to shoot fast-moving subjects with the M than with a DSLR. My old 40D is a lot easier and more successful for that.

A huge part of what makes the M hard to use in such situations is the lack of an eye-level viewfinder. In outdoor lighting, with quick subjects, using the LCD on the back of any camera really limits you.

What I hope, is that Canon will release an M3 and other small-system bodies with eye-level EVFs that make outdoor and fast-subject shooting possible and effective.

The image quality I get with the M and the "kit" lens are fantastic. But with a great eye-level EVF, shooting would be a lot easier.

The touch screen is handy at times, but at other times a royal pain. Anyone else tired of the camera shooting when their belly touches it? :)

0 upvotes
wwkloo
By wwkloo (Jun 8, 2013)

Found the MTF on the web, looks fair for the price. And fortunately, there are 2 aspherical elements. Long to see more in-depth review.

1 upvote
Skrocki
By Skrocki (Jun 8, 2013)

Maybe it is time for DPREVIEW to finally do a complete review of the often maligned Canon EOS-M. I have been shooting with one since December. It is a great little camera that goes with me everywhere and the image quality is wonderful. It is very good in low light.

I'm looking forward to purchasing the new ultra wide image stabilized lens.

4 upvotes
Dames01
By Dames01 (Jun 26, 2013)

I would bet that the EOS M preview will be updated soon after the firmware update becomes available at the end of this month.
A full review is no longer necessary as far as I am concerned as the camera comes with the same sensor and touch screen as the 650d...

0 upvotes
vladimir vanek
By vladimir vanek (7 hours ago)

Wells, seems you'd lose. :)

0 upvotes
Tropical Photos
By Tropical Photos (Jun 7, 2013)

I had the EOS M...Great image quality...need to fix the autofocus. Canon really needs to put out more lenses. The lens adaptor idea is cool, but really, if you are going to buy a small travel camera, why would you want to put your big lenses on it? Defeats the purpose.

I sold my EOS M and purchased the Sony NEX 6. LOVE IT! I rarely pull my 5D Mark 2 out. The NEX 6 smokes the EOS M!

0 upvotes
jpr2
By jpr2 (Jun 8, 2013)

monies, dear, monies!!! esp. if one already has on their shelves about 30 EF great lenses ready to be used a moments' whim; in particular as: [a] AF is more slow than molasses; [b] there is no built-in EVF; [c] no flippy screen either; [d] external controls are skimped over in favor of that obnoxious touch-screen's poke-me-forever UI, so... the system is really not very appealing to jump boats quite now. Also, the M-lenses line is so poor :( !!

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
olddog99
By olddog99 (Jun 19, 2013)

I've still got the EOS M, but I acquired a Sony NEX 7 to fill most of the purposes intended for the M - a second travel camera etc with 5d3.It isn't perfect,but it's head and shoulders above the M. I'm not a great fan of EVT but it's a finder. Image quality is first rate - so was the M if in focus.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Jun 7, 2013)

55m filter thread is fine, and works easily with any 58mm filter with a step-up ring (sure beats buying more costly filters, just use the ones one already has).

and since step-up rings are actually thin (minimal depth), the wider ringed larger 58mm will mount easily 'out of sight' even if it isn't a 'thin filter'. as for any filter, it is at the wider angle end of the FL, that vignetting is possible.

folks have to remember Canon's EOS-M mirrorless body was intentionally a 'launch bare bones' basic model (minimal 'brick' form ergonomics being the worst like most digicams and most 'brick' mirrorless) to begin with, as a potential 'prosumer' version easily can be held off for later, as there are other lower and upper range models going through updates too. there is a price for 'pocketability' and that will always be wretchedly bad ergonomics of a 'bare brick form body'.

sdyue

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Jun 7, 2013)

the lens may look like the funny Touit with a 58mm filter.

0 upvotes
dwill23
By dwill23 (Jun 7, 2013)

People here do not have marketing degrees. Well, neither do I but I've had classes during my accounting and finance majors, and work with them all the time. When you're on top, which sales would indicate Canon and Nikon you don't have to innovate. That is why monopolies are so terrible for innovation. Your grandmas can tell you about the AT&T black phones that didn't change for 30 years.

Whereas Canon and Nikon may not have a monopoly, they certainly make up for the vast majority of camera sales. They rely on their branding and loyalty to sell cameras, and don't have to take such huge risks like other companies.

Anyone remember the Minolta SLR film cameras? They had tons of stupid gimmicks to try to get you to buy them, like the 'eye start' where it would start to focus as soon as it detected your face near the back and your hand was touching a metal band on the trip.

Canon and nikon are happy sitting on their thrones. Buy what will work best for your job/hobby.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
rwbaron
By rwbaron (Jun 8, 2013)

The irony though is that those AT&T black phones had better voice intelligibilty and were more reliable than the garbage we deal with today. The price was dirt cheap too (free) and you never paid to have anything fixed in the rare case it broke because everything was massively overbuilt. Today's land line phones are throw-aways with cr@p voice quality by comparison and cellular voice quality is even worse.

The only people who made out on the AT&T breakup were the attorneys. The rest of us got screwed.

3 upvotes
jtmon
By jtmon (Jun 15, 2013)

The irony is you don't know what you are talking about. The black phones were crap, were RENTED, and some people paid rent on them still to this very day. You honestly don't have a clue if you think breaking up AT&T was bad.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 17, 2013)

Minolta's demise had nothing to do with features on their cameras that you didn't like. They lost a long, drawn out lawsuit over the unlicensed use of an autofocusing patent. On top of this, there were, and still are too many different camera manufacturers for consumers to support.

Canon and Nikon are not sitting on thrones and most aspects of the camera business are in decline. Nikon has held on through ingenuity and brand loyalty; Canon has done better due to it's size and scale.

0 upvotes
CNY_AP
By CNY_AP (Aug 2, 2013)

Funny, some camera article this week said it focuses when you put your eye up to the viewfinder is my recollection. Seems like a good idea to me.
My mom still has a few black rotary phones - they are super solid/heavy phones. You can buy large handsets like that on amazon for your iphone; etc...they surely won't last as long though.

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (Aug 21, 2013)

Whoever owned them, the company or the customer, the voice quality was awesome. There is nothing today that even comes close.

1 upvote
wwkloo
By wwkloo (Jun 7, 2013)

Where can I find the MTF? BTW, this lens does not have any aspherical element at all?

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Jun 7, 2013)

http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/ef-m/ef-m11-22-f4-56is-stm/spec.html

1 upvote
LukeDuciel
By LukeDuciel (Jun 7, 2013)

the MTF seems unreal. if the performance is really there, Canon needs a much better EOS-M body.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Jun 7, 2013)

there will be a new firmware that improves single shot AF 1.3x to 2.3x faster.

0 upvotes
Frugaltraveler
By Frugaltraveler (Jun 6, 2013)

Sorry Canon YOU ARE LATE in the GAME. I left you LONG ago for micro four third.

4 upvotes
THESMURF
By THESMURF (Jun 6, 2013)

Canon and Nikon Dinosaurs... Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji are years ahead of them

0 upvotes
CNY_AP
By CNY_AP (Aug 2, 2013)

Nikon seems OK, they just used the smaller sensor is all. I assume the new Sony backlit 1" sensor will be used on the next generation.

Also, obviously the 70D sensor will be in the next "M" camera...and perhaps will be the best focusing camera?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jun 6, 2013)

I don't own one of these cameras but it seems that, as with the little Nikon, the only people who like them are those who own and use them. The folks who compare statistics or are concerned that a particular feature is "two years behind" don't like these cameras at all.

8 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (Jun 6, 2013)

Thanks for posting side-by-side with adapted SLR lens. Really shows the size advantage of the EOS-M. Also, 55mm ND filters are cheap and small, or if you already have the other filters get a step up ring.

Canon is smart to release the ultra wide, as you say the class of lens that will see the greatest benefit on a mirrorless with a short flange distance.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Jun2
By Jun2 (Jun 6, 2013)

Can this lens adapted to NEX?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Jun 6, 2013)

No

0 upvotes
Macx
By Macx (Jun 6, 2013)

Looks like a fine lens. The problem is the EOS-M body that frankly seems crippled to avoid stealing sales from Canon's own APS format dSLRs.

1 upvote
Marvol
By Marvol (Jun 6, 2013)

"we'll look at how well it performs just as soon as we can"

Why are you already committing to review a fairly specialised lens of a rather unimpressive mirrorless system? Surely you can do better things with your time?

For comparison I noticed that, unless I am missing something (I searched this site), you haven't reviewed the EOS M itself. I can only find a preview from July 2012. So you're willing to review this lens (not the kit lens, not the prime) on a camera you haven't reviewed in nearly a year? Srsly?

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (Jun 6, 2013)

Presumably, like all new systems they will review the initial offering s of lenses at the same time. Also, things that aren't good need to be reviewed as well, there needs to be benchmarks of the good and bad you know?

Besides I have owned and used all the major systems and the M isn't nearly as bad as it is made out to be. I will be buying this lens for sure.

1 upvote
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jun 6, 2013)

kid.... first it´s canon.

second this will be still a supported mirrorless system when oly and panasonic are broke and gone from the camera biz.

canon just improved the AF speed in one shot focusing about 2 times with a firmware update.

i rather invest money in a canon system then in a system with a questionable future.

it´s not looking good for olympus and panasonic.

2 upvotes
Hobbit13
By Hobbit13 (Jun 6, 2013)

Why are you thinking Panasonic's and Olympus's camera systems are almost gone? It's true that those companies are not doing very well. But the camera devisions are worth way too much to be abandoned. If those companies go bankrupt, someone will buy the camera devisions, and will continue making m4/3 cameras!

0 upvotes
BozillaNZ
By BozillaNZ (Jun 6, 2013)

Because he is a blind Canon fanatic. The M system is a fail. It's the biggest joke in mirrorless camera history. Get your head out of the sandpit. I'd rather invest my money into the M43 platform which are supported by many manufacturers, than putting all the egg into the falling basket!

1 upvote
flipmac
By flipmac (Jun 26, 2013)

@Henry M. Hertz: so you would rather get the EOS-M than say an E-PL5, which has better IQ, more features (IBIS, tilting screen, optional EVF, etc.) for the same money? Then there's the m43 lens line up, which has lenses performing better than many EF/EF-S lens mounted on cropped Canon.

0 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (Jun 6, 2013)

One minor error. The Olympus 9-18mm is not the smallest wide angle zoom available. The Nikon CX (Nikon 1) 6.7-13mm is slightly shorter and lighter, as would be expected with a smaller sensor. It's a terrific little lens, optically sophisticated and modern, and stabilized, too. One of several nice new lenses Nikon has been tempting Nikon 1 owners with.

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (Jun 6, 2013)

They mention the Nikon is smaller still.

1 upvote
Jefftan
By Jefftan (Jun 6, 2013)

Sony NEX 10-18 F4 225 gram
Canon 11-22mm F4-5.6 220 gram

not as wide, not as bright and same weight

What's going on? Is this the best what Canon can do?
Can't understand

2 upvotes
Sean Nelson
By Sean Nelson (Jun 6, 2013)

My guess is that they're trying to keep the lens compact to take advantage of the biggest benefit of mirrorless cameras - small size. But because they have to maintain full coverage of an APS-C sized sensor they can't really shrink the lens unless they compromise somewhere, and it looks like maximum aperture is where they took the hit.

2 upvotes
Jefftan
By Jefftan (Jun 6, 2013)

same weight as NEX 10-18
F5.6 at 35mm !!!!
useless in low light
the only benefit maybe cheaper, NEX 10-18 is $850

Canon thinking is that mirrorless user are not serious photographer and not willing to spend

Big mistake and they will paid for it
in fact I would choose NEX over it just for the NEX 10-18mm alone

1 upvote
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Jun 6, 2013)

Here's a few more numbers you forgot to compare:
Canon 11-22mm: 61 x 58mm, £380
Sony 10-18mm, 70 x 64mm, £670
Different tradeoffs, that's all.

12 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (Jun 6, 2013)

Well the Canon has longer reach and range. The Canon is also quite a lot smaller and nearly half the price and it loses 1 stop at the much longer end than the Sony. I own both systems (and m43's), I will buy the Canon 11-22mm and have no interest in buying the massive Sony or the 'just as slow, but extremely cheap feeling, but much more expensive Olympus 9-18.

2 upvotes
TheProv
By TheProv (Jun 6, 2013)

It's obvious: Canon wants to mantain low price (nex 10-18 costs 700 € this one 300 €) and size (nex 10-18 is the same weight but bigger).

It's not a stupid move.

2 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jun 6, 2013)

i can only laugh when morons say "canon will pay for it"
guys do a reality check... canon is making a PROFIT!!
sony, oly and panasonic are struggling in the camera biz.

and you clowns still question canons product politics.
you are really naive....

the day canon decides to take over the mirrorless market they will.
today they just focus on other systems and make ..did i mentioned it?.. a PROFIT.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Timbukto
By Timbukto (Jun 6, 2013)

Ah yes the Sony which again has caused no fanfare due to being yet another lens with overpriced optics, frequent decentering and poor QC, and even when photozone tests for the better of the two edges or corners it still does rather poorly even stopped down in regards to vignetting or CA? Sony...has the best sensor for which to suck up light via poor quality lenses. This is why NEX remains the MF legacy lens platform.

1 upvote
viking79
By viking79 (Jun 6, 2013)

It is f/5.6 at 22mm, not 35mm (I know what you are meaning, but it is incorrect to state it as such). Sony 10-18mm is really an f/5.6 lens in function, at least if you want decent corners. I much prefer the smaller size to this Canon. I have a Samsung 12-24mm f/4-5.6 which is also very nice sized (just a couple mm larger than this lens).

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Markintosh
By Markintosh (Jun 6, 2013)

first, you don't need brighter lens when it comes to ultra wide range.
second, don't forget 11-22 is optical stabilized lens — this is add some weight. I'm 100% sure it will be a fantastic lens, like entire EOS-M lenses line-up:)

0 upvotes
photonius
By photonius (Jun 6, 2013)

Well, look at the photozone review of the Sony lens. It's optical properties are not that great, rather poor at f4. All points towards the Canon being even better than it's well regarded EF-S 10-22. So, I rather prefer Canon's approach, even if on paper Sony's specs seem better.

0 upvotes
yslee1
By yslee1 (Jun 7, 2013)

I'll bet the optics are way better. Sony NEX lenses are predictable - sharp in the centre, totally crap once you get out of it.

0 upvotes
CNY_AP
By CNY_AP (Aug 2, 2013)

Canon EF-S 0-22 is an awesome lens in every way, and my camera (XSi/450d) doesn't have any cheating (lens corrections) in the firmware. It's one reason I am tempted to buy another Canon DSLR.

0 upvotes
BozillaNZ
By BozillaNZ (Jun 6, 2013)

As a long term Canon user, I already gave up on Canon's mirror-less attempts. I started looking at M4/3 gears for a long time and finally pulled trigger for a Panasonic GX1 for $229. The M4/3 lens ranges are far better than this and, oh, the GX1 can actually focus, FAST. Also guess where does the M4/3 fund come from? Selling some of the Canon lenses.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (Jun 6, 2013)

Fascinating,,,, fascinating,,, no wait,,,, I mean that other word,,, tedious. And no,, the GX1 does not focus fast,,,, it just focuses faster than the EOS-M

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Tomas Cermak
By Tomas Cermak (Jun 6, 2013)

I did the same. Bought G5. Small and light. I was Canon user but I was not willing to wait any further....

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (Jun 6, 2013)

Different things for different people. They all have their pros and cons - I hated the M, but somehow bought one and now I love it. My m43's and NEX stays at home and my M is in my bag with me right now.

Yeah focus isn't super fast, but I have had worse. Other than that, it is a fine camera really.

4 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jun 6, 2013)

and who cares?

btw: canon just improved focusing speed on the EOS M about 2 times with a firmware update out in june.

the m43 system will always have a smaller sensor
and i really don´t see usefull size benefit from m43.

m43 will be the small sensor P&S of the future.....

1 upvote
Steve
By Steve (Jun 6, 2013)

i think you got it backwards.. m43 (or a similarly sized sensor) will be the standard for advanced shooters.. and maybe for pro work, as technology gets better ..
p&S of the future will be ONLY phones.. already companies are beginning to ditch their point and shoots from their catalogs.

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
BozillaNZ
By BozillaNZ (Jun 6, 2013)

No useful size benefit from m43? Did you see those pancake prime lenses 14, 17, 20, 25, 45? Lumix 7-14 ultra wide zoom? Long teles in the size of DSLR normal lens? And M's focus speed is 2 times as fast! Yay! Still way too slow though. And yes, m43 sensor is smaller than APS-C, but at least those sensors are good, up-to-date ones, unlike the M uses the lame 18mp Canon sensor which originated from 7D and passed along to 60D, 550D, 600D, 650D, 700D, which is noisy in ISO 100 in day light.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
CNY_AP
By CNY_AP (Aug 2, 2013)

The Oly Pen's sensor is amazing (and Panasonic uses the same exact sensor?)... I never thought they'd be competitive, but (after years of Canon not moving forward on IQ), they (m43) seem to have the lowest noise (even a tad better than Sony's 16 MP sensor on the NEX) while retaining color saturation and sharpness.

0 upvotes
Beat Traveller
By Beat Traveller (Jun 6, 2013)

What I don't get is why this lens is only compatible with the EOS M. What about the EOS100 they just released? Why would you go to all the trouble of designing "the world's smallest DSLR" and then develop compact lenses that can't be used with it?

0 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (Jun 6, 2013)

You're kidding right? Do you even know what flange distance is?

14 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (Jun 6, 2013)

What Juck is getting at is that the 100D/SL1 was designed to work with standard dslr lenses that are mounted well out from the sensor. The EOS-M has a very different design, with the lens mount only a short distance in front of the sensor. Lenses designed for the EOS-M not only wouldn't physically and electronically mount on an EOS-100D/SL1, but even if they did attach, they'd be the wrong distance from the sensor, throwing off all kinds of things. It's possible to mount a dslr lens on a mirrorless body with a tubular adapter that holds the lens further from the body, so it is the right distance from the body, but that process doesn't work in reverse.

1 upvote
waitformee
By waitformee (Jun 6, 2013)

The heaviest lens is much more heavier then the heaviest camera. So it is more important to reduce the weight and size of the lens then to reduce the weight and size of the camera.

Canon have the smallest DSLR but got no small lens that goes with it. So eventually why smallest body only?

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Jun 6, 2013)

> Canon have the smallest DSLR but got no small lens that goes with it.

Well, they do have that 40mm (64mm on APS) f2.8 pancake

4 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (Jun 6, 2013)

Because this lens is designed for a MIRRORLESS, which means it isn't and never will be a DSLR... Even completely ignoring the flange distance.

1 upvote
Beat Traveller
By Beat Traveller (Jun 6, 2013)

Oh yeah, flange distance. /facepalm.

0 upvotes
vladimir vanek
By vladimir vanek (Aug 20, 2013)

in fact, this might be possible with an optical adapter that would correct the image projection of the -M lens to a DSLR sensor. but, there would be many drawbacks on quality plus it would cost a lot of money, which is a combination that would not be interesting for any of the parties (neither the producer nor the consumer).

0 upvotes
enfi
By enfi (9 months ago)

As 39 years old enthusiastic photographer, who happens to be suffering from Sciatica I have to say that the Canon EOS M was a healthy addition to my kit, good enough quality so that I don't miss my 5D II so much, in a smaller and lighter package. Now Canon, please release this (and other) EFS-M lenses in the US

0 upvotes
Total comments: 83