EF-M Lenses: Not as durable as I thought...

Ben Herrmann wrote:

Canon's initial EF-M offerings - the 18-55, the 22 MM, and the 11-22 MM were all built like little tanks - and love those metal lens mounts. Optically they also do a very good job and the 22 and the 11-22 are optical marvels for the price.

But something ridiculous happened on the way to the forums (pun intended) - Canon elected to get cheap. Everything produced after those 3 gorgeous lenses turned into all plastic designs with the exception of some 3rd party lenses that feature superb construction with metal mounts. And the bantering back and forth between the "metal lens mount" fans and those who are "purveyors of the plastic lens mount," is ongoing. IMO, there's some truth and logic to customers wanting better constructed optics.

This is but one facet of the EF-M lens line in general that prevents me from purchasing more M serious bodies - that is, both the quality and the pitiful number of EF-M lenses available. Think about it - Canon has released 8 M bodies since the M was first released - only to have a current selection of 7 Canon EF-M lenses (6 really since the 18-55 is no longer being produced).

Now lest any of the EOS M fanboys infer that I'm knocking the system - I'm not - not by a long shot! I enjoy shooting with the system, but many of us aren't satisfied with the current EF-M selection of optics.

In a way I'm going a bit off-topic here, but in the vein of "it could be worse"/"let's hope they don't go that far!" you could take a close look at Canon's new cheapest DSLR (except that it isn't "cheaper enough" yet as far as its actual price goes) - the EOS 4000D/3000D (not sure if it has a US designation or even will be on sale in the US) - it's a scary illustration of how cheap Canon is willing to go on construction etc.  It was launched alongside the EOS 2000D/1500D/Rebel T7, which is a direct replacement for the EOS 1300D/Rebel T6.  The 2000D/T7 ups the old model to a 24MP sensor but otherwise leaves it unchanged, aside from one weird downgrade it shares with the new 4000D (there's no large X contact in the hotshoe any more, just a blank, so they cannot use cheap undedicated flashes and even some of Canon's own units aren't fully functional) but by comparison the 4000D is a bit of a shocker.  It stays at 18MP (not a sin), is made of especially cheap polycarbonate, has an all-plastic lens mount (we've seen this before back in film days and these days only Sony had done it on the a58 and a68, but it always looks ugly), a lift-it-yourself flash (like the EOS M50, thankfully the only "downgrade" it shares with these and it's not too bad a feature), no rear thumbgrip material, a 2.7" 230k dot LCD (when was the last time we tried to ignore the dots on a resolution that low?), control labels printed next to buttons because it's cheaper and no blue paint for any of the legends either for the same reason, no on/off switch (just an OFF position on the mode dial - so you can't leave it set to your favourite shooting mode, ready to go), no eyesight correction facility for the viewfinder.  They bundle it with the worst variant of the 18-55 still made, unsurprisingly, yet it barely costs any less than the 4000D.  Both models (and their predecessor) dropped the automatic dust removal systems from the sensor too.

At least they're not doing that to the EOS M range (yet  )...