Previous page Next page

Design

The 11-22mm bears more than a passing resemblance to Canon's EF-M 18-55mm kit zoom, and shares all of the same design cues. So the entire 'skin' of the barrel is made of metal, including the zoom and focus rings which have finely-patterned grips. The mount is metal, and the extending portion of the barrel is plastic. Both zoom and focus rings operate satisfyingly smoothly - the overall impression is of a nicely-made product.

The lens uses a similar retraction mechanism to that pioneered by Olympus on its original Micro Four Thirds kit zoom, and now used by several other manufacturers including Samsung and Nikon. To extend the lens from its collapsed position, you simply rotate the zoom ring to the 11mm mark or beyond, and shoot away as normal. At this point a catch mechanism comes into play that prevents you from inadvertently rotating the zoom ring back past 11mm. To retract the lens, you first have to push forward the sprung lock switch on the side of the barrel.

In the view above we've shown the lens in its collapsed and longest 'operational' positions (at 11mm). The barrel retracts slightly in the middle of the zoom range before extending again at 22mm, which means that the length saving in the collapsed position is about 13mm. This isn't quite as impressive as some other lenses, but worthwhile nonetheless.

On the camera

The 11-22mm balances nicely on the EOS M, and operates almost identically to the 18-55mm kit zoom. The wide zoom ring falls nicely to hand, and when the lens is retracted, the overall package is impressively compact. In fact it's probably the smallest available option for pairing a wideangle zoom with an APS-C sensor (although the Micro Four Thirds Olympus PEN E-PM2 and M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4-5.6 is smaller still).

With its existing firmware the EOS M can't recognise when the lens is in its retracted position, and will allow the shutter to release. Canon recommends updating the firmware to the co-announced Version 2.0.0 for full compatibility, which as a bonus promises faster autofocus with all lenses.

Size and design compared to existing Canon EF-M lenses

Here's the 11-22mm sitting in between the EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-.6 IS STM kit zoom and the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM pancake. The family resemblance is immediately obvious - in fact owners of both zooms may well struggle to tell them apart at a quick glance. The main visual differences are the 11-18mm's wider zoom ring and lock switch.

Size compared to other wideangle zooms

There's the 11-22mm nestling between Canon's EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM for APS-C SLRs, and the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4-5.6, which is one of the smallest wideangle zooms currently on the market (the Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 6.7-13mm f/3.5-5.6 is even smaller). The 11-22mm has neither the range nor the brightness of its EF-S stablemate, but it's clearly a lot smaller (and barely more than half the weight). It may not be quite as tiny as the Olympus lens, but it covers a larger sensor, and packs in optical image stabilisation too.

Compared to EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - on the camera

One of the biggest advantages afforded by mirrorless systems is that not only can the cameras be made smaller, but lenses often can too, with the biggest advantages generally gained with wide zooms. Here's the EF-M 11-22mm on the EOS-M compared to the EF-S 10-22mm on Canon's smallest SLR, the diminutive EOS 100D (Rebel SL1). The 11-22mm may not offer quite as wide a view, but it does include image stabilisation. Of course mirrorless systems come with a other compromises (and advantages) too.

Here we're comparing the EOS M fitted with the EF-M 11-22mm, to the EF-S 10-22mm on the Mount Adapter EF-EOS M. Here the 11-22mm is less than half the weight, and little over half the length; not surprisingly it also autofocuses much better.

Autofocus

The 11-22mm uses a very similar AF system to the 18-55mm kit zoom, and our initial impression using an EOS M running Firmware 1.0.6 is that the autofocus speed is very similar too. That is to say, it's acceptable for many purposes but not breathtakingly quick, especially in comparison to the extremely high bar set by Olympus and Panasonic in particular. Of course the really big unknown is how much of an improvement Canon delivers with Firmware 2.0.0.

Lens body elements

The lens uses Canon's EF-M mount, and currently only works on the EOS M mirrorless model.

All communication between the camera and lens is electronic, via the array of gold-plated contacts.
The filter thread is 55mm, which unfortunately isn't shared with any existing Canon lenses. Filters don't rotate on focusing.

A bayonet mount around the thread accepts the optional petal-type EW-60E lens hood (see below).
The focus ring is 13mm wide, but the fine diamond-pattern grip only takes up 3mm of this. It rotates smoothly and continuously, without end-stops. Manual focus is driven electronically, using the lens's built-in focus motor.
The zoom ring has a 20mm wide diamond-patterned grip. It rotates 40 degrees between the 11mm and 22mm settings, with additional marked positions for 12mm, 14mm and 17mm.
To collapse the lens to its carrying position, you simply slide forward this sprung lock switch, and rotate the zoom ring a further 40 degrees past the 11mm position.
This is the petal-type EW-60E lens hood. Sadly Canon doesn't provide it as standard, but wait a month or two and cheap, good quality clones will doubtless appear from Chinese factories.

We can't help but feel that this strategy of not providing lens hoods, and attempting to get customers to pay extra for them, is now almost entirely counter-productive.

First Impressions

The EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM is Canon's third lens for its mirrorless EOS M camera, and adds a useful wideangle capability in a package that's impressively compact - especially considering that it's got optical image stabilisation too. Our initial feeling is that it's a rather nice little lens that's pretty well-built, and a good match for the EOS M. It could well offer an interesting alternative for landscape or travel photographers who want a wide zoom, but wish to reduce the weight of the kit they're carrying.

Arguably the bigger question, though, is whether Firmware 2.0.0 will improve the EOS M's focusing performance to make it a more credible contender in this market. Because, however good the 11-22mm turns out to be, at the moment it only works on a single camera that's just a little underwhelming compared its peers - especially in terms of autofocus performance. If Canon really wants to compete seriously in this increasingly popular segment, it'll surely have to get up to speed sooner rather than later.

Previous page Next page

Comments

Total comments: 34
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (3 hours ago)

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.

0 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (5 hours ago)

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
1 upvote
Jun2
By Jun2 (6 hours ago)

Can this lens adapted to NEX?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (6 hours ago)

No

0 upvotes
Macx
By Macx (10 hours ago)

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.

0 upvotes
Marvol
By Marvol (11 hours ago)

"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 (9 hours ago)

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.

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (8 hours ago)

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.

0 upvotes
Hobbit13
By Hobbit13 (7 hours ago)

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
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (12 hours ago)

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 (9 hours ago)

They mention the Nikon is smaller still.

0 upvotes
Jefftan
By Jefftan (13 hours ago)

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

1 upvote
Sean Nelson
By Sean Nelson (12 hours ago)

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.

1 upvote
Jefftan
By Jefftan (11 hours ago)

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 (10 hours ago)

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.

8 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (9 hours ago)

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.

0 upvotes
TheProv
By TheProv (9 hours ago)

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.

1 upvote
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (8 hours ago)

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 (6 hours ago)

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.

0 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (5 hours ago)

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 (2 hours ago)

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 (54 min ago)

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
BozillaNZ
By BozillaNZ (14 hours ago)

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
1 upvote
Juck
By Juck (14 hours ago)

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
3 upvotes
Tomas Cermak
By Tomas Cermak (10 hours ago)

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 (9 hours ago)

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.

1 upvote
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (8 hours ago)

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.....

0 upvotes
Steve
By Steve (7 hours ago)

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
0 upvotes
Beat Traveller
By Beat Traveller (14 hours ago)

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 (14 hours ago)

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

12 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (11 hours ago)

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 (11 hours ago)

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 (10 hours ago)

> 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

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (9 hours ago)

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.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 34