Canon EF-S 24mm: Brilliantly high image quality affordable APS-C lens

Dave wrote:

Miki Nemeth wrote:

The EFS 24mm is a perfect fit on a small mirrorless camera.

Am I the only one amused that the adapter is about the same size as the lens? Maybe the 24mm's "hood" would've visually balanced things.

Very good point. Adapting lenses designed for long flange distance cameras are far from perfect when the "smallest possible size" is the goal. In this regard, I guess the small EOS-M6 with the EOS-M 22mm would be a better option for a 35mm FOV APS-C camera.

Both the Sony E and the Canon M have the same 18mm flange distance, but the $1000 Sony 24mm/f1.8 is 65mm, 224g while the $250 EOS-M 22mm/f2 is only 2.3mm, 105g.

Actually, I am selling my EF-S 24mm, since I love the PZ16-50mm much better.

The EOS M6 is 5mm taller, 2mm longer and nearly twice as heavy 520g vs 283g) as the A5100, but to get a fast high quality "35mm FoV" ILC the M6 + 22mm is better and (much) cheaper.

Miki Nemeth wrote:

Dave wrote:

Miki Nemeth wrote:

The EFS 24mm is a perfect fit on a small mirrorless camera.

Am I the only one amused that the adapter is about the same size as the lens? Maybe the 24mm's "hood" would've visually balanced things.

Very good point. Adapting lenses designed for long flange distance cameras are far from perfect when the "smallest possible size" is the goal. In this regard, I guess the small EOS-M6 with the EOS-M 22mm would be a better option for a 35mm FOV APS-C camera.

Both the Sony E and the Canon M have the same 18mm flange distance, but the $1000 Sony 24mm/f1.8 is 65mm, 224g while the $250 EOS-M 22mm/f2 is only 2.3mm, 105g.

Actually, I am selling my EF-S 24mm, since I love the PZ16-50mm much better.

The EOS M6 is 5mm taller, 2mm longer and nearly twice as heavy 520g vs 283g) as the A5100, but to get a fast high quality "35mm FoV" ILC the M6 + 22mm is better and (much) cheaper.

I'd take an M5 over an M6 to get the viewfinder.  Anything larger than a Rebel looks kinda funny to me with a pancake.  Doesn't mean it won't work well, though.

Miki Nemeth wrote:

Dave wrote:

Miki Nemeth wrote:

The EFS 24mm is a perfect fit on a small mirrorless camera.

Am I the only one amused that the adapter is about the same size as the lens? Maybe the 24mm's "hood" would've visually balanced things.

Very good point. Adapting lenses designed for long flange distance cameras are far from perfect when the "smallest possible size" is the goal. In this regard, I guess the small EOS-M6 with the EOS-M 22mm would be a better option for a 35mm FOV APS-C camera.

Both the Sony E and the Canon M have the same 18mm flange distance, but the $1000 Sony 24mm/f1.8 is 65mm, 224g while the $250 EOS-M 22mm/f2 is only 2.3mm, 105g.

Actually, I am selling my EF-S 24mm, since I love the PZ16-50mm much better.

The EOS M6 is 5mm taller, 2mm longer and nearly twice as heavy 520g vs 283g) as the A5100, but to get a fast high quality "35mm FoV" ILC the M6 + 22mm is better and (much) cheaper.

I own a NEX-7 which was as I'm sure you know, the first high-end NEX camera, just recently followed by the A6500. The NEX-7 is larger than your A5100, although lacking in some modern specifications. I still love it, especially it's 'tri-navi' controls.

I originally purchased the EFS-24 and EF-40 to put onto my NEX-7, but didn't because of the expense and slowness of the Viltrox and some other adapters. Meanwhile, I occasionally use them on a Canon T1i, as I said before. If you or anyone else knows of a new decent fast inexpensive adapter with AF, please write in, thanks.

I also have the e-16-50 PZ lens mounted on a NEX 5R but I'm disappointed with it's optical quality. I suggest keeping your EFS-24 for more serious work.

It's a joy to use on my 70D, autofocus is almost instantaneous, since it was made for aps-c and not originally the M series... The native ef-m 22mm probabaly makes more sense on an M camera?

I've also tried the 40mm, another great lens. At $150 each, they're almost no brainers and a huge competitive advantage for Canon, together with the 10-18.