I don't like how it needs to be unlocked like the 11-22. Adding an unnecessary step imo
It is also a plastic mount and likely a plastic body like the 55-200mm.
From what is in the picture, it is a plastic mount but I doubt it's a plastic body. The 55-200mm has a plastic mount though the body is metal like the other EF-M lens bodies. I have all 4 of the current EF-M lenses and have not had an issue with the plastic mount on the 55-200mm.
This was discussed quite a bit when the 55-200 was released. It really is a plastic body. It is painted to look identical to the metal bodies of the other lenses, but it is indeed plastic. If you look closely, you can see the parting lines from injection molding process. I used to own this lens. At one point I carefully scratched a small spot on the barrel using a knife and conclusively verified it is plastic.
In the third photo with side-on view, you can faintly see a parting line in the knurling for the zoom ring at the 15mm position. This is similar to the parting lines that are on the 55-200mm lens.
All of the lenses have plastic internals. The 11-22mm, 22mm, and 18-55mm have a metal shell and metal mount. The 55-200mm and now the 15-45mm have a plastic shell with a plastic mount.
Is the plastic mount and plastic body bad? Technically, No. But is does detract from the quality feeling of the system and makes some of lens prices seem questionable. Why is the all plastic 55-200 more expensive than the metal mount 55-250STM? Why is the list price for the all plastic 15-45mm the same as the full metal 18-55mm?
