11-22 on m6II - some first shots

MAC · Mar 26, 2022

getting my bearings on my new 11-22 - from 22 mm to 11mm - liking this small setup with my m6II at iso 100 and e-shutter

a stroller in one hand and the camera in the other -- one handed with IS engaged

no bag -- my 11-22 + 32 travels in my pockets with no bag and my security strap- all I need to take for the scenes and portraits

IS enabled and e-shutter and iso 100 - no shock for stills - love it

dxo PL5 for barrel and vignetting corrections - love it

noting -- negligible CA in the trees with the 11-22 - love it

DXO processing -- a bit of vibrancy, saturation and micro-contrast added

I wanted a system more than an iphone where the camera doesn't interrupt the flow and experiences of the day - like having a baby in a stroller and one-handing the photos with a small powerful camera

M6II + 11-22 +32 +DXO PL5 is my go everywhere companion for stills (11-22) and candids (32) where I want more than an iphone

Sittatunga · Mar 26, 2022

Lovely lens, a joy to use, never off one of my cameras. It justifies the whole EOS M system.

At 22mm there's zero distortion and you can fill the short side of the frame with a wristwatch (remember them?) 60mm from the front of the lens. With the barrel distortion at 11mm corrected in DxO, you can get a little more horizontal coverage if you expand the crop to 16:9.

R2D2 · Mar 26, 2022

Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

R2

MAC · Mar 26, 2022

Sittatunga said:
Lovely lens, a joy to use, never off one of my cameras.

agree, it is now my default lens on my m6II. I bring in the 32 for 32 subjects, but the 11-22 will cover many of my future subjects

Sittatunga said:
It justifies the whole EOS M system.

agree with this - I never bought the EF 16-35 f4L nor the RF 14-35 L because of price and weight.

Sittatunga said:
At 22mm there's zero distortion

agree, and 35 FOV is perfect. So far I haven't found a need to buy a 22 prime

Sittatunga said:
and you can fill the short side of the frame with a wristwatch (remember them?) 60mm from the front of the lens.

right - from the front of the lens vs mfd of 150mm (6 inches) from the body

Sittatunga said:
With the barrel distortion at 11mm corrected in DxO, you can get a little more horizontal coverage if you expand the crop to 16:9.

I'll need to try -- thanks for the tip!

MAC · Mar 26, 2022

R2D2 said:
Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Yep! Whew! That was a long-time ordeal

R2D2 said:
Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

Yep and Nope

1/40, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 -- all tested side by side with 100% magnification at 22 mm -- NO Shutter Shock on my 11-22 Lens -- Yeah!

That said I love e-shutter for still life with this lens and that is my default

R2D2 said:
R2

KEG · Mar 26, 2022

MAC said:
Sittatunga said:

Lovely lens, a joy to use, never off one of my cameras.

Click to expand...

agree, it is now my default lens on my m6II. I bring in the 32 for 32 subjects, but the 11-22 will cover many of my future subjects

MAC said:

It justifies the whole EOS M system.

Click to expand...

agree with this - I never bought the EF 16-35 f4L nor the RF 14-35 L because of price and weight.

MAC said:

At 22mm there's zero distortion

Click to expand...

agree, and 35 FOV is perfect. So far I haven't found a need to buy a 22 prime

That pictures kind of shows why one owns the EF-M 22, it is because it is tiny. The vignetting doesn't really bother me all that much.

MAC said:
MAC said:

and you can fill the short side of the frame with a wristwatch (remember them?) 60mm from the front of the lens.

Click to expand...

right - from the front of the lens vs mfd of 150mm (6 inches) from the body

MAC said:

With the barrel distortion at 11mm corrected in DxO, you can get a little more horizontal coverage if you expand the crop to 16:9.

Click to expand...

I'll need to try -- thanks for the tip!

--
KEG

R2D2 · Mar 26, 2022

MAC said:
R2D2 said:

Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Click to expand...

Yep! Whew! That was a long-time ordeal

MAC said:

Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

Click to expand...

Yep and Nope

1/40, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 -- all tested side by side with 100% magnification at 22 mm -- NO Shutter Shock on my 11-22 Lens -- Yeah!

That said I love e-shutter for still life with this lens and that is my default

Was just wondering, as you might be able to eke out a little more IQ from a 14-bit file than from a 12-bit.

R2

MAC · Mar 26, 2022

R2D2 said:
MAC said:

R2D2 said:

Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Click to expand...

Yep! Whew! That was a long-time ordeal

R2D2 said:

Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

Click to expand...

Yep and Nope

1/40, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 -- all tested side by side with 100% magnification at 22 mm -- NO Shutter Shock on my 11-22 Lens -- Yeah!

That said I love e-shutter for still life with this lens and that is my default

Click to expand...

Was just wondering, as you might be able to eke out a little more IQ from a 14-bit file than from a 12-bit.

R2

your R5 is using 12-bit for e-shutter to be able to motor high speed in e-shutter

the M6II is using single shot in e-shutter so no motor speed reduced file size needed

I found the file sizes from e-shutter and m-shutter are similar so I don't think it is 12 bit

what makes you think that e-shutter from the m6II is only 12-bit?

R2D2 · Mar 27, 2022

MAC said:
R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Click to expand...

Yep! Whew! That was a long-time ordeal

MAC said:

Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

Click to expand...

Yep and Nope

1/40, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 -- all tested side by side with 100% magnification at 22 mm -- NO Shutter Shock on my 11-22 Lens -- Yeah!

That said I love e-shutter for still life with this lens and that is my default

Click to expand...

Was just wondering, as you might be able to eke out a little more IQ from a 14-bit file than from a 12-bit.

R2

Click to expand...

your R5 is using 12-bit for e-shutter to be able to motor high speed in e-shutter

the M6II is using single shot in e-shutter so no motor speed reduced file size needed

I found the file sizes from e-shutter and m-shutter are similar so I don't think it is 12 bit

what makes you think that e-shutter from the m6II is only 12-bit?

Oh, sorry. I must have been thinking of the M6ii’s Raw Burst Mode’ @ 12-bit. Shoot away!

R2

ps. I’d add that the R5’s PDR (Photons to Photos) for mShutter and eShutter measures exactly the same at ISO’s from 800 on up. These higher ISOs are where I use eShutter (for my action shooting @ 20 fps).

It would be interesting to see what PtoP’s tests show for the M6ii (but they haven’t done any yet). R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

MAC · Mar 27, 2022

R2D2 said:
MAC said:

R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Click to expand...

Yep! Whew! That was a long-time ordeal

R2D2 said:

Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

Click to expand...

Yep and Nope

1/40, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 -- all tested side by side with 100% magnification at 22 mm -- NO Shutter Shock on my 11-22 Lens -- Yeah!

That said I love e-shutter for still life with this lens and that is my default

Click to expand...

Was just wondering, as you might be able to eke out a little more IQ from a 14-bit file than from a 12-bit.

R2

Click to expand...

your R5 is using 12-bit for e-shutter to be able to motor high speed in e-shutter

the M6II is using single shot in e-shutter so no motor speed reduced file size needed

I found the file sizes from e-shutter and m-shutter are similar so I don't think it is 12 bit

what makes you think that e-shutter from the m6II is only 12-bit?

Click to expand...

Oh, sorry. I must have been thinking of the M6ii’s Raw Burst Mode’ @ 12-bit. Shoot away!

Instead of Raw Burst Mode at 18 mpxl files, I will use C-RAW at 14 fps to get 60 frames before slowing down.

R2D2 said:
R2

ps. I’d add that the R5’s PDR (Photons to Photos) for mShutter and eShutter measures exactly the same at ISO’s from 800 on up. These higher ISOs are where I use eShutter (for my action shooting @ 20 fps).

yeah, as long as no rolling shutter, go for it!

R2D2 said:
It would be interesting to see what PtoP’s tests show for the M6ii (but they haven’t done any yet). R2

BClaff has offered -- if you follow the discussion here:

Re: because there is nothing else: Canon EOS M Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

MAC · Mar 27, 2022

KEG said:
MAC said:

Sittatunga said:

Lovely lens, a joy to use, never off one of my cameras.

Click to expand...

agree, it is now my default lens on my m6II. I bring in the 32 for 32 subjects, but the 11-22 will cover many of my future subjects

KEG said:

It justifies the whole EOS M system.

Click to expand...

agree with this - I never bought the EF 16-35 f4L nor the RF 14-35 L because of price and weight.

KEG said:

At 22mm there's zero distortion

Click to expand...

agree, and 35 FOV is perfect. So far I haven't found a need to buy a 22 prime

Click to expand...

That pictures kind of shows why one owns the EF-M 22, it is because it is tiny. The vignetting doesn't really bother me all that much.

that is a BIG difference

I haven't excluded it -- I saw a sale a year ago for a $159 silver one -- that would drive me to buy one

KEG said:
KEG said:

KEG said:

and you can fill the short side of the frame with a wristwatch (remember them?) 60mm from the front of the lens.

Click to expand...

right - from the front of the lens vs mfd of 150mm (6 inches) from the body

KEG said:

With the barrel distortion at 11mm corrected in DxO, you can get a little more horizontal coverage if you expand the crop to 16:9.

Click to expand...

I'll need to try -- thanks for the tip!

Click to expand...

thunder storm · Mar 27, 2022

KEG said:
KEG said:

agree, and 35 FOV is perfect. So far I haven't found a need to buy a 22 prime

Click to expand...

That pictures kind of shows why one owns the EF-M 22, it is because it is tiny. The vignetting doesn't really bother me all that much.

For non moving objects the ratio light gathering to size&weight is a factor imo. Over 8 times the light for 2 times the weight&size is a good deal imo.

And if you're a viewfinder shooter not willing to fiddle around with attaching and detaching a viewfinder the advantage for size factor is reduced compared to the picture shown above.

R2D2 · Mar 27, 2022

MAC said:
R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Click to expand...

Yep! Whew! That was a long-time ordeal

MAC said:

Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

Click to expand...

Yep and Nope

1/40, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 -- all tested side by side with 100% magnification at 22 mm -- NO Shutter Shock on my 11-22 Lens -- Yeah!

That said I love e-shutter for still life with this lens and that is my default

Click to expand...

Was just wondering, as you might be able to eke out a little more IQ from a 14-bit file than from a 12-bit.

R2

Click to expand...

your R5 is using 12-bit for e-shutter to be able to motor high speed in e-shutter

the M6II is using single shot in e-shutter so no motor speed reduced file size needed

I found the file sizes from e-shutter and m-shutter are similar so I don't think it is 12 bit

what makes you think that e-shutter from the m6II is only 12-bit?

Click to expand...

Oh, sorry. I must have been thinking of the M6ii’s Raw Burst Mode’ @ 12-bit. Shoot away!

Click to expand...

Instead of Raw Burst Mode at 18 mpxl files, I will use C-RAW at 14 fps to get 60 frames before slowing down.

Yup, pick your poison!

MAC said:
MAC said:

R2

ps. I’d add that the R5’s PDR (Photons to Photos) for mShutter and eShutter measures exactly the same at ISO’s from 800 on up. These higher ISOs are where I use eShutter (for my action shooting @ 20 fps).

Click to expand...

yeah, as long as no rolling shutter, go for it!

For my own shooting, not one frame with rolling shutter issues yet (out of 50,000+).

MAC said:
MAC said:

It would be interesting to see what PtoP’s tests show for the M6ii (but they haven’t done any yet). R2

Click to expand...

BClaff has offered -- if you follow the discussion here:

Re: because there is nothing else: Canon EOS M Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Yes, the M Series always gets the back seat. ;-)

R2

MAC · Mar 27, 2022

R2D2 said:
MAC said:

R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Click to expand...

Yep! Whew! That was a long-time ordeal

R2D2 said:

Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

Click to expand...

Yep and Nope

1/40, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 -- all tested side by side with 100% magnification at 22 mm -- NO Shutter Shock on my 11-22 Lens -- Yeah!

That said I love e-shutter for still life with this lens and that is my default

Click to expand...

Was just wondering, as you might be able to eke out a little more IQ from a 14-bit file than from a 12-bit.

R2

Click to expand...

your R5 is using 12-bit for e-shutter to be able to motor high speed in e-shutter

the M6II is using single shot in e-shutter so no motor speed reduced file size needed

I found the file sizes from e-shutter and m-shutter are similar so I don't think it is 12 bit

what makes you think that e-shutter from the m6II is only 12-bit?

Click to expand...

Oh, sorry. I must have been thinking of the M6ii’s Raw Burst Mode’ @ 12-bit. Shoot away!

Click to expand...

Instead of Raw Burst Mode at 18 mpxl files, I will use C-RAW at 14 fps to get 60 frames before slowing down.

Click to expand...

Yup, pick your poison!

M6II beats my 7dII -- in a small package -- that is not poison

R2D2 said:
R2D2 said:

R2D2 said:

R2

ps. I’d add that the R5’s PDR (Photons to Photos) for mShutter and eShutter measures exactly the same at ISO’s from 800 on up. These higher ISOs are where I use eShutter (for my action shooting @ 20 fps).

Click to expand...

yeah, as long as no rolling shutter, go for it!

Click to expand...

For my own shooting, not one frame with rolling shutter issues yet (out of 50,000+).

impressive

R2D2 said:
R2D2 said:

R2D2 said:

It would be interesting to see what PtoP’s tests show for the M6ii (but they haven’t done any yet). R2

Click to expand...

BClaff has offered -- if you follow the discussion here:

Re: because there is nothing else: Canon EOS M Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Click to expand...

Yes, the M Series always gets the back seat. ;-)

well Chris says in the latest video that the M6II is one of his favorite handling APSC cameras

DPReview TV: The five best handling digital cameras of all time: Digital Photography Review

I'd agree with that assessment having had 10 APSC cameras in the last 20 years as well as 3 FF cameras -- the M6II tops my list for handling in 13 cameras

In the long run I'd love to see them market a firmware update provided with the purchase of a long lens for animal focus - the strength of apsc is reach -- it bugs me when things are absolutely possible -- but that would reduce their FF dollars -- but someone else will do it to them if they don't

R2D2 said:
R2

MAC · Mar 27, 2022

thunder storm said:
KEG said:

thunder storm said:

agree, and 35 FOV is perfect. So far I haven't found a need to buy a 22 prime

Click to expand...

That pictures kind of shows why one owns the EF-M 22, it is because it is tiny. The vignetting doesn't really bother me all that much.

Click to expand...

For non moving objects the ratio light gathering to size&weight is a factor imo. Over 8 times the light for 2 times the weight&size is a good deal imo.

8 times the light?

4 time the light

thunder storm said:
And if you're a viewfinder shooter not willing to fiddle around with attaching and detaching a viewfinder the advantage for size factor is reduced compared to the picture shown above.

R2D2 · Mar 27, 2022

MAC said:
R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

MAC said:

R2D2 said:

Congrats on the new lens! Finally!

Click to expand...

Yep! Whew! That was a long-time ordeal

MAC said:

Have you tested it with mShutter yet? Any shock?

Click to expand...

Yep and Nope

1/40, 1/60, 1/80, 1/100 -- all tested side by side with 100% magnification at 22 mm -- NO Shutter Shock on my 11-22 Lens -- Yeah!

That said I love e-shutter for still life with this lens and that is my default

Click to expand...

Was just wondering, as you might be able to eke out a little more IQ from a 14-bit file than from a 12-bit.

R2

Click to expand...

your R5 is using 12-bit for e-shutter to be able to motor high speed in e-shutter

the M6II is using single shot in e-shutter so no motor speed reduced file size needed

I found the file sizes from e-shutter and m-shutter are similar so I don't think it is 12 bit

what makes you think that e-shutter from the m6II is only 12-bit?

Click to expand...

Oh, sorry. I must have been thinking of the M6ii’s Raw Burst Mode’ @ 12-bit. Shoot away!

Click to expand...

Instead of Raw Burst Mode at 18 mpxl files, I will use C-RAW at 14 fps to get 60 frames before slowing down.

Click to expand...

Yup, pick your poison!

Click to expand...

M6II beats my 7dII -- in a small package -- that is not poison

I was referencing C-RAW with its reduced DR and increased noise levels, that's all.

All features (in any camera) have their advantages and disadvantages. My "poison" is using eShutter on the R5, but it doesn't have a negative effect at the ISOs I shoot action with (ISO 800+).

MAC said:
MAC said:

MAC said:

MAC said:

R2

ps. I’d add that the R5’s PDR (Photons to Photos) for mShutter and eShutter measures exactly the same at ISO’s from 800 on up. These higher ISOs are where I use eShutter (for my action shooting @ 20 fps).

Click to expand...

yeah, as long as no rolling shutter, go for it!

Click to expand...

For my own shooting, not one frame with rolling shutter issues yet (out of 50,000+).

Click to expand...

impressive

I did have a bee shot once (just once) on my M6ii that exhibited a rolling shutter effect...

Pulled from the trash bin

One shot in over 50,000 with this camera isn't bad either.

MAC said:
MAC said:

MAC said:

MAC said:

It would be interesting to see what PtoP’s tests show for the M6ii (but they haven’t done any yet). R2

Click to expand...

BClaff has offered -- if you follow the discussion here:

Re: because there is nothing else: Canon EOS M Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Click to expand...

Yes, the M Series always gets the back seat. ;-)

Click to expand...

well Chris says in the latest video that the M6II is one of his favorite handling APSC cameras

Yes, my very favorite!!

MAC said:
DPReview TV: The five best handling digital cameras of all time: Digital Photography Review

I'd agree with that assessment having had 10 APSC cameras in the last 20 years as well as 3 FF cameras -- the M6II tops my list for handling in 13 cameras

+1

MAC said:
In the long run I'd love to see them market a firmware update provided with the purchase of a long lens for animal focus - the strength of apsc is reach -- it bugs me when things are absolutely possible -- but that would reduce their FF dollars -- but someone else will do it to them if they don't

Come on M6 Mark III!!! :-D

R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.

Galleries by Jekyll & Hyde

www.pbase.com

thunder storm · Mar 27, 2022

MAC said:
thunder storm said:

KEG said:

MAC said:

agree, and 35 FOV is perfect. So far I haven't found a need to buy a 22 prime

Click to expand...

That pictures kind of shows why one owns the EF-M 22, it is because it is tiny. The vignetting doesn't really bother me all that much.

Click to expand...

For non moving objects the ratio light gathering to size&weight is a factor imo. Over 8 times the light for 2 times the weight&size is a good deal imo.

Click to expand...

8 times the light?

4 time the light

3 stops more = 8 times the light

If you need 1/80th with the 22mm and the IBIS of the RF lens does 3 stops you will need 1/10th with the 35mm, which is eight times as long. The T-stop of the RF 35mm is also brighter.

MAC said:
MAC said:

And if you're a viewfinder shooter not willing to fiddle around with attaching and detaching a viewfinder the advantage for size factor is reduced compared to the picture shown above.

Click to expand...

--
45 is more than enough, but 500.000 isn't

nnowak · Mar 27, 2022

R2D2 said:
R2D2 said:

R2D2 said:

R2

ps. I’d add that the R5’s PDR (Photons to Photos) for mShutter and eShutter measures exactly the same at ISO’s from 800 on up. These higher ISOs are where I use eShutter (for my action shooting @ 20 fps).

Click to expand...

yeah, as long as no rolling shutter, go for it!

Click to expand...

For my own shooting, not one frame with rolling shutter issues yet (out of 50,000+).

If you are shooting sports/action, It is likely there in some shots, but it can be hard to spot with organic shapes. Out of 4000 shots from a recent shoot, I had to delete about 10 because the athlete's helmet was starting to look a little egg shaped. A couple more got deleted because the athlete's body was starting to look a little weird. It is definitely not a glaring issue, but once you spot it, it is hard to ignore.

MAC · Mar 27, 2022

thunder storm said:
MAC said:

thunder storm said:

KEG said:

thunder storm said:

agree, and 35 FOV is perfect. So far I haven't found a need to buy a 22 prime

Click to expand...

That pictures kind of shows why one owns the EF-M 22, it is because it is tiny. The vignetting doesn't really bother me all that much.

Click to expand...

For non moving objects the ratio light gathering to size&weight is a factor imo. Over 8 times the light for 2 times the weight&size is a good deal imo.

Click to expand...

8 times the light?

4 time the light

Click to expand...

3 stops more = 8 times the light

if it were 3 stops I'd agree it would be 8 times the light

the RF 35 has the shallow dof advantage of f1.8 versus the m 22 which is FF equivalent of F3.2

Realistically -- how many times are you going to shoot F1.8 at ss 1/10 if you have a tad of motion

Rather for equivalency sake

Set the RF 35 f1.8 to an aperture of F3.2. Set the m22 to an aperture of F2 (FF equivalent of F3.2). Set the shutter speeds on both cameras to ss 1/125 to stop a tad of blinking motion

Then -- indoors -- what would be the iso's on both cameras?

thunder storm said:
If you need 1/80th with the 22mm and the IBIS of the RF lens does 3 stops you will need 1/10th with the 35mm, which is eight times as long. The T-stop of the RF 35mm is also brighter.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

And if you're a viewfinder shooter not willing to fiddle around with attaching and detaching a viewfinder the advantage for size factor is reduced compared to the picture shown above.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

thunder storm · Mar 27, 2022

I said what I said: "For non moving objects" etc.

And yes, in these situations I do use slow shutter speeds. Love it.

If you need a minimum of DOF the full frame advantage is gone, especially when comparing the RP sensor to the M6II sensor.

If you need a faster shutter speed the advantage of stabilization is gone.

I'm not debating this.

11-22 on m6II - some first shots

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts