If you could only have 3, 6, or 9 lenses for your M system?

Larry Rexley wrote:

lumenite wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

Thought experiment to assess the value, importance, and usage of lenses on our M cameras...

If you could only own a set of 3, 6, or 9 lenses for your Canon M system, which would you choose for each set?

Here are mine:

3 lenses:

- Canon EF-M 11-22,

- Canon 32mm f1.4

- Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM with adapter

Exactly same here!

6 lenses:

- Canon 11-22mm IS STM

- SIgma 16mm f1.4

- Canon 22mm f2

- Canon 18-150 IS STM

- Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM with adapter

- Rokinon 135mm f2.0

Why do you throw away the fantastic 32mm for this group?
I would go for 11-22, 22, 32, 56, 55-250, and 18-150 although I do not have 18-150.

Truth be told, the EF-M 32mm f1.4 is one of my least used Canon M lenses! I know it's spectacular, but it's just not a focal length I shoot very much. 22mm to me is more of a 'normal' focal length on APS-C... even back in the film days my #1 lens for the Canon FD system was the 35mm f2 lens, and after that I used the 24mm f2.8 more than my 50mm f1.4.

Since equivalent 35mm provides me a versatile view angle, I love to use it. Without EFM 22mm, I would have not entered into EOS M system in the first place. So, if I was asked as to what lens would be the one if I have to choose only one, it would be very tough between 22mm and 32mm. I really love the comfortableness that the equivalent 50mm gives with its fast aperture. What about you? What would you choose if you have only one lens for EOS M?

9 lenses

- Laowa 9mm f2.8

- Canon 11-22mm IS STM

- SIgma 16mm f1.4

- Canon 22mm f2

- Canon 32mm f1.4

- Canon 18-150 IS STM

- Sigma 56mm f1.4

- Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM with adapter

- Rokinon 135mm f2.0

Rokinon 8, 12, TTartisan 17, Canon 11-22, 22, 32, 55-250, 18-150, and Sigma 56. For this combination, I wish there were Rokinon AF 12mm and Sigma 18-55 f/2.8 for EFM mount.

I too wish there was a Roki 12mm f2 AF lens... love the 12 manual Roki lens for low light and astro.

I really like the Roki 8 fisheye as well, but after getting the Laowa 9mm, the 9 has become my go-to ultrawide, as it's useful for me in a lot more situations than the Roki 8. I think its price puts people off... it did me for a very long time but I managed to find one for $300 used, and am glad I took the plunge. It's so small as well, easy to take along. It's the only lens that I feel has that 'fun factor' of being tiny but really useful and sharp, like the Canon 22.

The Canon 11-22 is in itself an ultra-wide, but after switching to it from the EF-S 10-18mm I noticed I couldn't get as many buildings from the same spot in my city shots --- and the Laowa 9 is wider than both, quite sharp, and has virtually no distortion. And the Laowa actually has a depth of field scale (unlike ANY other lens I have in EF-M mount), which is really useful at that focal length!! The Laowa's focus scale is very accurate and I find that for my shooting with it (trains at a certain distance or landscapes) I can set the focus using the scale based on what I'm shooting, and it's always dead on.

If I hadn't gotten the Laowa used, I'd probably have jumped on the $399 holiday pricing still going on at B&H. After using the lens, now I think that's a great deal. The normal price is $500 and it was looking like I was going to have to pay $400 for it used.

Thank you for your brief review on Laowa 9mm, which sounds wonderful. However, I am thankful that I am not a big fan of wide angle prime lenses since its usage is very restricted in my case. So I cannot buy it! The reason why I like Rokinons is they are cheap, especially when I do not use them often. By the way, the Laowa lens looks really attractive in terms of its zero distortion, while I enjoy Rokinon 8mm's fish-eye very much.