Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Preview: Digital Photography Review

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.

Canon Ef-m 11-22mm F/4-5.6 Is STM Lens	$469.99
Canon EF-M 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS STM Compact System Lens	Too low to display

Get more prices from Amazon

Comments

Total comments: 79

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

0 upvotes

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?

1 upvote

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.

0 upvotes

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!

0 upvotes

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

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

1 upvote

Seems too wide to be offered as a kit lens.

1 upvote

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... ;)

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

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

Comment edited 9 seconds after posting

1 upvote

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

Sony and Leica have full frame mirrorless cameras.

0 upvotes

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

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

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

@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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

0 upvotes

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

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.

1 upvote

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

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

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

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

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

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

1 upvote

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

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

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

4 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

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.

6 upvotes

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

Can this lens adapted to NEX?

0 upvotes

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

"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

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

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

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

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

@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

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

They mention the Nikon is smaller still.

1 upvote

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

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

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

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.

10 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2 upvotes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

14 upvotes

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

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

> 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

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

Oh yeah, flange distance. /facepalm.

0 upvotes

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

Total comments: 79

Editorial content

Product database

Community