Canon 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 EF-M IS STM coming

rrccad · Jul 22, 2015

EvokeEmotion said:
b f said:

If they release this lens, at least we see a new ef-m mount member after two years! Other than that, it sounds pointless to me. I already have 11-22 and 18-55 zooms. I prefer my 11-22 over this range. I do wish they offer a good 50mm instead.

Click to expand...

I can't agree that it's pointless. The 18-55 billion-units-a-year kit zoom is a lousy focal range. 18mm on the wide end is simply not wide enough. Yes, there's 11-22, but then that's UWA, and it's not long enough to walk around with most of the time. The (FFe) 24mm wide end is ideal, as can be seen in the popularity of the 24-70 and 24-105 for the pro and prosumer crowd.

I am glad Canon doesn't just say: yeah we gave the M the same old 18-55 kit zoom and we're done with that focal range. I'm happy to see that Canon realize the M needs a 15mm and up zoom. In fact, I wish the 18-55 kit zoom will just rot and die, and never come back, ever.

lol. it's not that bad, optically it's pretty good . but the focal range is a bit uninspiring.

a 15-85 3.5-6.3 though would have made more sense in practicality .. or my fav .. the 15-135mm 3.5-6.3.

but a small pancake zoom will certainly hit my bag assuming it's good - and canon usually doesn't make crap optics these days.

EvokeEmotion · Jul 22, 2015

rrccad said:
EvokeEmotion said:

b f said:

If they release this lens, at least we see a new ef-m mount member after two years! Other than that, it sounds pointless to me. I already have 11-22 and 18-55 zooms. I prefer my 11-22 over this range. I do wish they offer a good 50mm instead.

Click to expand...

I can't agree that it's pointless. The 18-55 billion-units-a-year kit zoom is a lousy focal range. 18mm on the wide end is simply not wide enough. Yes, there's 11-22, but then that's UWA, and it's not long enough to walk around with most of the time. The (FFe) 24mm wide end is ideal, as can be seen in the popularity of the 24-70 and 24-105 for the pro and prosumer crowd.

I am glad Canon doesn't just say: yeah we gave the M the same old 18-55 kit zoom and we're done with that focal range. I'm happy to see that Canon realize the M needs a 15mm and up zoom. In fact, I wish the 18-55 kit zoom will just rot and die, and never come back, ever.

Click to expand...

lol. it's not that bad, optically it's pretty good . but the focal range is a bit uninspiring.

a 15-85 3.5-6.3 though would have made more sense in practicality .. or my fav .. the 15-135mm 3.5-6.3.

but a small pancake zoom will certainly hit my bag assuming it's good - and canon usually doesn't make crap optics these days.

Oh I totally meant the focal range. 18mm sucks. 15mm is just about right for a normal zoom for me. But yeah, at these kinds of apertures, I expect it to be small, otherwise, no business from me.

Photato · Jul 22, 2015

The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

b f · Jul 22, 2015

EvokeEmotion said:
b f said:

If they release this lens, at least we see a new ef-m mount member after two years! Other than that, it sounds pointless to me. I already have 11-22 and 18-55 zooms. I prefer my 11-22 over this range. I do wish they offer a good 50mm instead.

Click to expand...

I can't agree that it's pointless. The 18-55 billion-units-a-year kit zoom is a lousy focal range. 18mm on the wide end is simply not wide enough. Yes, there's 11-22, but then that's UWA, and it's not long enough to walk around with most of the time. The (FFe) 24mm wide end is ideal, as can be seen in the popularity of the 24-70 and 24-105 for the pro and prosumer crowd.

I am glad Canon doesn't just say: yeah we gave the M the same old 18-55 kit zoom and we're done with that focal range. I'm happy to see that Canon realize the M needs a 15mm and up zoom. In fact, I wish the 18-55 kit zoom will just rot and die, and never come back, ever.

The popular 24-70s are high quality f/2.8 or f/4 glass. I don't compare this lens with L series FF lenses.

I do agree this is a better walk around range when compared to 18-55. If it's a pancake then it can be a plus. However, I know for sure that I will not buy this lens.

Lawrencew · Jul 23, 2015

Photato said:
The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

The specs come from Canon Russia's own submission to Russian Customs

Loading…

188.254.71.82

Adam-T · Jul 23, 2015

Olympus did it , 12-50 F3.5-6.3 and got slammed to hell and back for it - and still are years later

F6.3 is only acceptable in the tele end of a superzoom like an 18-250/270/300 , on a standard zoom it`s beyond ludicrous .

smozes · Jul 23, 2015

Is the the 24-70 popular because it can't get any larger? Since when is 70 a useful end for a tele?

T3 · Jul 23, 2015

Photato said:
The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

I don't think it's a typo. It seems like something Canon would do. Canon is definitely a company that likes to aim low these days. Max f/6.3 aperture at the 45mm end seems like it would be right up their alley, sadly.

EvokeEmotion · Jul 23, 2015

T3 said:
Photato said:

The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a typo. It seems like something Canon would do. Canon is definitely a company that likes to aim low these days. Max f/6.3 aperture at the 45mm end seems like it would be right up their alley, sadly.

A company aiming low would not have released the widest rectilinear zoom in the world (11-24).

Or the highest megapixel 35mm FF sensor DSLR in the world (5Ds).

Or the fastest shooting DSLR in the world (1Dx).

Your disdain for Canon is well known on DPReview. But sometimes, you gotta slow down and see if you actually believe what you type.

45mm f/6.3 - looks bad on paper, but what is the size? How can you draw conclusion before you even see the dimensions? I'm sure someone can come up with a 1000mm f/1.0 FF lens, but do you need a Ford F150 to haul that thing around?

T3 · Jul 23, 2015

EvokeEmotion said:
T3 said:

Photato said:

The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a typo. It seems like something Canon would do. Canon is definitely a company that likes to aim low these days. Max f/6.3 aperture at the 45mm end seems like it would be right up their alley, sadly.

Click to expand...

A company aiming low would not have released the widest rectilinear zoom in the world (11-24).

Or the highest megapixel 35mm FF sensor DSLR in the world (5Ds).

Or the fastest shooting DSLR in the world (1Dx).

Your disdain for Canon is well known on DPReview. But sometimes, you gotta slow down and see if you actually believe what you type.

45mm f/6.3 - looks bad on paper, but what is the size? How can you draw conclusion before you even see the dimensions? I'm sure someone can come up with a 1000mm f/1.0 FF lens, but do you need a Ford F150 to haul that thing around?

I am a Canon user. I don't think there's anything wrong with raising criticism where it's warranted. And it's obvious that Canon has been putting fairly minimal effort into their EOS M system. Don't you want better for the EOS M system? I do, and I have wanted better from the EOS M system from the very beginning. Let's not be apologists for the EOS M system or for Canon. It's like when Canon announced the XC10 with no RAW support. People jumped up in Canon's defense, saying that RAW was not needed! Come on, really? In a $2500 camera? And Canon's excuse for not offering RAW in the XC10 was "cost". OK, maybe it was a bit extreme to say that Canon "likes to aim low". But for many of their products, they definitely do like to try to offer as little as they can when it comes to specs, seemingly in the hopes that people will buy it anyways because it's a Canon.

I think a lot of EOS M users would love to have some good fast glass, not more slow zooms, for the EOS M system.

G-D · Jul 23, 2015

AdamT said:
Olympus did it , 12-50 F3.5-6.3 and got slammed to hell and back for it - and still are years later

F6.3 is only acceptable in the tele end of a superzoom like an 18-250/270/300 , on a standard zoom it`s beyond ludicrous .

johnsmith404 · Jul 23, 2015

EvokeEmotion said:
T3 said:

Photato said:

The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a typo. It seems like something Canon would do. Canon is definitely a company that likes to aim low these days. Max f/6.3 aperture at the 45mm end seems like it would be right up their alley, sadly.

Click to expand...

A company aiming low would not have released the widest rectilinear zoom in the world (11-24).

Or the highest megapixel 35mm FF sensor DSLR in the world (5Ds).

Or the fastest shooting DSLR in the world (1Dx).

Your disdain for Canon is well known on DPReview. But sometimes, you gotta slow down and see if you actually believe what you type.

To be fair, anything Canon that isn't related to DSLRs really isn't too ambitious. The M system they don't even try to sell globally. And their new 1-inch line comes with interesting price tags (1000$ + 250$) for a fixed lens camera with no filter threads (no joke).

EvokeEmotion said:
45mm f/6.3 - looks bad on paper, but what is the size? How can you draw conclusion before you even see the dimensions? I'm sure someone can come up with a 1000mm f/1.0 FF lens, but do you need a Ford F150 to haul that thing around?

Gotta agree about this though. f5.6 or f6.3, either are too dark to use in anything but good conditions.

Lawrencew · Jul 23, 2015

T3 said:
I am a Canon user. I don't think there's anything wrong with raising criticism where it's warranted. And it's obvious that Canon has been putting fairly minimal effort into their EOS M system. Don't you want better for the EOS M system? I do, and I have wanted better from the EOS M system from the very beginning. Let's not be apologists for the EOS M system or for Canon. It's like when Canon announced the XC10 with no RAW support. People jumped up in Canon's defense, saying that RAW was not needed! Come on, really? In a $2500 camera? And Canon's excuse for not offering RAW in the XC10 was "cost". OK, maybe it was a bit extreme to say that Canon "likes to aim low". But for many of their products, they definitely do like to try to offer as little as they can when it comes to specs, seemingly in the hopes that people will buy it anyways because it's a Canon.

I think a lot of EOS M users would love to have some good fast glass, not more slow zooms, for the EOS M system.

Same here. I was a champion of the M system - but no more.

The M3 turned it for me. It was billed as an "enthusiasts camera" http://www.canon.co.uk/for_home/product_finder/cameras/digital_slr/enthusiasts/ but clearly isn't with slow AF and slow Burst. The only thing enthusiast about it is the absurd high price for what it is.

And as for a 'System', well Canon seem to be saddling the M system with nothing but kit lenses. One prime when the original M was launched, one decent UWA, and nothing else to even consider. Their idea seems to be if you want anything more then that's what the adaptor is for. Unfortunately, they forgot to tune the M3 for EF lenses...

And why anyone in the USA would defend the M is beyond me when Canon flat out refuse to even sell them to you!

There. Got that off my chest

EvokeEmotion · Jul 23, 2015

T3 said:
EvokeEmotion said:

T3 said:

Photato said:

The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a typo. It seems like something Canon would do. Canon is definitely a company that likes to aim low these days. Max f/6.3 aperture at the 45mm end seems like it would be right up their alley, sadly.

Click to expand...

A company aiming low would not have released the widest rectilinear zoom in the world (11-24).

Or the highest megapixel 35mm FF sensor DSLR in the world (5Ds).

Or the fastest shooting DSLR in the world (1Dx).

Your disdain for Canon is well known on DPReview. But sometimes, you gotta slow down and see if you actually believe what you type.

45mm f/6.3 - looks bad on paper, but what is the size? How can you draw conclusion before you even see the dimensions? I'm sure someone can come up with a 1000mm f/1.0 FF lens, but do you need a Ford F150 to haul that thing around?

Click to expand...

I am a Canon user. I don't think there's anything wrong with raising criticism where it's warranted. And it's obvious that Canon has been putting fairly minimal effort into their EOS M system. Don't you want better for the EOS M system? I do, and I have wanted better from the EOS M system from the very beginning. Let's not be apologists for the EOS M system or for Canon. It's like when Canon announced the XC10 with no RAW support. People jumped up in Canon's defense, saying that RAW was not needed! Come on, really? In a $2500 camera? And Canon's excuse for not offering RAW in the XC10 was "cost". OK, maybe it was a bit extreme to say that Canon "likes to aim low". But for many of their products, they definitely do like to try to offer as little as they can when it comes to specs, seemingly in the hopes that people will buy it anyways because it's a Canon.

I think a lot of EOS M users would love to have some good fast glass, not more slow zooms, for the EOS M system.

Now, now, you said 'Canon', not 'Canon EOS M'. Notice my counterpoints are all non-M related.

EvokeEmotion · Jul 23, 2015

johnsmith404 said:
EvokeEmotion said:

T3 said:

Photato said:

The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a typo. It seems like something Canon would do. Canon is definitely a company that likes to aim low these days. Max f/6.3 aperture at the 45mm end seems like it would be right up their alley, sadly.

Click to expand...

A company aiming low would not have released the widest rectilinear zoom in the world (11-24).

Or the highest megapixel 35mm FF sensor DSLR in the world (5Ds).

Or the fastest shooting DSLR in the world (1Dx).

Your disdain for Canon is well known on DPReview. But sometimes, you gotta slow down and see if you actually believe what you type.

Click to expand...

To be fair, anything Canon that isn't related to DSLRs really isn't too ambitious. The M system they don't even try to sell globally. And their new 1-inch line comes with interesting price tags (1000$ + 250$) for a fixed lens camera with no filter threads (no joke).

johnsmith404 said:

45mm f/6.3 - looks bad on paper, but what is the size? How can you draw conclusion before you even see the dimensions? I'm sure someone can come up with a 1000mm f/1.0 FF lens, but do you need a Ford F150 to haul that thing around?

Click to expand...

Gotta agree about this though. f5.6 or f6.3, either are too dark to use in anything but good conditions.

He wasn't saying EOS M specifically in his original statement. So I take it to mean Canon's entire camera business. I actually don't disagree with the many criticism of the M system.

EvokeEmotion · Jul 23, 2015

Lawrencew said:
And why anyone in the USA would defend the M is beyond me when Canon flat out refuse to even sell them to you!

There. Got that off my chest

Adam-T · Jul 23, 2015

G-D said:
Don't know at what focal length this new 24-72 mm-eq lens will hit F6.3, but the kitlens for the Panasonic GM1/5 (the tiny 12-32mm) is at 5.6 even before 64mm-eq.

so is the Canon M 18-55 which is 3X the length of the tiny Panasonic lens (which isn`t much bigger than the 14mm Pancake prime) .

G-D · Jul 23, 2015

AdamT said:
Adam-T said:

Don't know at what focal length this new 24-72 mm-eq lens will hit F6.3, but the kitlens for the Panasonic GM1/5 (the tiny 12-32mm) is at 5.6 even before 64mm-eq.

Click to expand...

so is the Canon M 18-55 which is 3X the length of the tiny Panasonic lens (which isn`t much bigger than the 14mm Pancake prime) .

Photato · Jul 23, 2015

AdamT said:
Olympus did it , 12-50 F3.5-6.3 and got slammed to hell and back for it - and still are years later

F6.3 is only acceptable in the tele end of a superzoom like an 18-250/270/300 , on a standard zoom it`s beyond ludicrous .

--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

Then I guess 6.3 will likely be, unfortunately.

However, I would not automatically dismiss this rumored lens without even seeing it.

Perhaps the price will be less than $200 and could be sharp, or a good macro.

Personally though, I'd like a 12mm f2 Prime and also a EF-M 60mm for Macro & Portrait.

Photato · Jul 23, 2015

T3 said:
Photato said:

The f6.3 aperture at the Tele end is really odd and might not be the real spec because every single Zoom Lens of this focal range and price level from Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc has a f5.6 as the Tele-end maximum aperture including the very compact ones.

So is that, or the lens design is really small and low cost so Canon had to compromise the end Aperture.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's a typo. It seems like something Canon would do. Canon is definitely a company that likes to aim low these days. Max f/6.3 aperture at the 45mm end seems like it would be right up their alley, sadly.

Well, Canon policy for a while has been to push FullFrame and SLR if you need "quality". Simply because the earning margin is higher would be my guess.

It has been like that with the EF-S but worst for the M.

I don't get it because the Mirrorless market is consolidating now fast around Sony, m4/3, Fuji , Samsung and soon the Chinese.

If I was Canon I would have already 3 Premium EF-M lenses.

I'd have a cheap B&W body and also a light and super compact body for Aerial and Action photography. Just like Sony and Olympus.

It feels as if there is a new generation of people calling the shots at Canon since the last 5 years but they are extremely conservative. Or perhaps a group of aging Managers that are losing the Plot.

Canon 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 EF-M IS STM coming

rrccad

Guest

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts