Re: Future of EOS-M cameras and EF-M lenses...
KevinRA wrote:
keeponkeepingon wrote:
Satyaa wrote:
this summer. And I started looking for a camera smaller than DSLR, and small primes.
Primes are perhaps the weekest segment of the EOS-M ecosystem.
From Canon we have 22, 28, and 32mm covering a whopping 10mm.
Is there any ecosystem today with such a week prime lineup?
3rd party support is also weak (compared to sony etc) but it does give us a few more options..... if you are OK with third party glass. There's the sigmas/viltrox but I don't think they count as "small primes" all of them are quite large.
Sigma 56mm f/1.4 is brilliant and pretty small for a f/1.4.
It's only the 16mm f/1.4 which is really approaching large - and one reason why I've not bothered with it.
Rokinon makes a few small primes but they are manual focus.
Did I miss anything?
But you only need one lens and if 22mm is good enough for you you are "good to go". It's an OK lens for the size/price but personally I don't think it's super great. The 32mm is suposedly better but it's also quite a bit bigger. Is it a "small prime"? Not compared to the 22mm or canon's 40mm but I'd say it's small for an F1.4 prime. But even so, depending on your pockets, it may affect the caryaroundablity of the system:
32mm f/1.4 is brilliant and pretty small.
A 11-22 IS, 28mm macro, 32mm f/1.4 and 56mm f/1.4 makes a great combination - adding either the 55-200 or EFS55-250 if more tele needed.
This is my lineup. I have the 55-200 (I decided to go for lightness over reach), the other lenses you listed, and the Laowa ZeroD 9mm as well. I also have the 22mm prime. Personally I don’t find a ton of utility with the 28mm macro, I’d probably skip it if I were buying again.