dpreviewTV: EF-M 22mm F2 not "ideal" for the M6 Mk II?

nnowak wrote:

RLight wrote:

The EF-M 22 outresolves the 20mm Sony, even at a MP deficiency on DXO Mark where the original EOS M (18MP) vs the 24MP A6000 per DXOMark...

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-M-22mm-F2-STM-on-Canon-EOS-M-versus-Sony-E-20mm-F28-on-Sony-A6000__989_819_1093_942

.

This whole lens not sharp enough for sensor business applies to everyone. But arguably least to Canon.

For a example, the EF-M 11-22 outrsolves the Sony 10-18 by 20%, once again being tested on an inferior 18MP body.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-M-11-22mm-F4-56-IS-STM-on-Canon-EOS-M-versus-Sony-E-10-18mm-F4-on-Sony-A6000__1170_819_1084_942

And lastly, the Sony 16-50, again, is outresolved with the MP advantage...

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-M-18-55mm-F35-56-IS-STM-on-Canon-EOS-M-versus-Sony-E16-50mm-F35-56-on-Sony-A6000__990_819_1082_942

First, what do Sony lenses have to do with the ability of EF-M lenses to resolve 32mp?

Simple. If you're going to grade a compact lens on performance, grade it against others in class. Otherwise, what you're really saying is you need bigger glass, at which point I vote buy a FF, but that defeats the point of an M. The point I'm drawing is to draw the readers attention to EF-M glass quality, for it's size/weight is quite high which the implication by DPR TV is that it's not good enough. Now to the point of being able to resolve 32MP, as others have stated, any of these lenses can resolve it. The real question becomes one of how much gain can one expect? Someone would have to do some benchmarks as EF-M glass doesn't get much love in that regard with metrics. DXO has some, but, they stopped testing after the 11-22, and never tested on the M3 or newer either so it's a stretch here of well this guy is better than that guy, which I just did, but doesn't directly answer the question to your point. It just gives you an idea what to expect if you're considering it vs another system, which the OP is coming from Sony I might add. If, you're gaining more lens resolution, and more sensor resolution, you can expect more resolution. Now can you expect FF resolution? As I said, EF-M glass needs more love in benchmarks

.

Optical limits has a couple more lenses tested, and with the M3, but, they lack the Sony 20mm. This is a hard question to answer with out some assumptions or fill in the blanks for the 22 in particular.

Second, a higher resolution sensor makes a lens look worse, not better. Switch your comparison to the 20mp a3000 and the Sony lenses get much closer to the EF-M lenses.

Sounds like DXO has anomalies (what a surprise) as 20MP should resolve less detail and score more poorly in sharpness, yet to your point when I switch it, ditto. That should be flipped. Good catch. The EF-M is still sharper, btw.

Third, you absolutely positively can not compare lens tests that were shot with different cameras. Different cameras means different image sensors, different micro lenses, different resolutions, different AA filters, different RAW conversions, etc. You can only compare lenses shot with the same camera. Here is the same lens tested on two different 20mp cameras with different results

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Tokina-AT-X-Pro-SD-11-16-F28-IF-DX-II-Nikon-on-Nikon-D500-versus-Tokina-AT-X-Pro-SD-11-16-F28-IF-DX-II-Canon-on-Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II__872_1061_871_977

Fourth, DXO scores are utter nonsense and virtually meaningless.

Lots of people say that, yet, I need a common benchmark to prove the point with numbers. DXO gives numbers and has the 20mm to compare it against. Too bad they don't have Fuji... We've had this discussion before.

I feel optical benchmarks are lacking out there. It's quite frustrating when trying to gather what one can expect. A best answer, is the best I can give. It's not "the" answer though to your point by any means. Far from it.