Woot! EF-M 35/1.8 & 15/2 coming!

[kotmj]

Loading…

www.canonrumors.com

 

[verum lens]

http://www.canonrumors.com/more-mentions-of-ef-m-prime-lenses-cr1/

Nice, those are some exciting lenses!

 

[thedanj]

I've been waiting for that 35 1.8 for a while now, and I'm excited for it.

 

[kotmj]

It's all coming together. Bright 15mm, 22mm & 35mm. I hope these new lenses have faster AF motors than the 22mm.

Consumer zoom-wise it's already pretty good with the 11-22, 18-55, 55-200 & 15-45.

 

[nnowak]

http://www.canonrumors.com/more-mentions-of-ef-m-prime-lenses-cr1/

Darn! I was hoping for something for portrait use such as a 50mm f1.8 or a fast 60mm macro.

I am assuming both of these rumored lenses will be pancakes and will lack IS.

 

[rrccad]

http://www.canonrumors.com/more-mentions-of-ef-m-prime-lenses-cr1/

wow.

i almost nearly had to change my pants at the thought of a 15/2. 24mm walk around lens. that's nearly perfect. I used to basically live with a 17mm prime on my APS-C dslr's for the longest of times.

 

[rrccad]

http://www.canonrumors.com/more-mentions-of-ef-m-prime-lenses-cr1/

Darn! I was hoping for something for portrait use such as a 50mm f1.8 or a fast 60mm macro.

I am assuming both of these rumored lenses will be pancakes and will lack IS.

35 i doubt will be a pancake. 15 they MAY be able to do .. it's within the range.

 

[4xdog]

I'm interested in any EF-M prime, so this is good news.

A fast-ish 80-85mm telephoto (a 135mm focal-length-equivalent) would have been my first choice, and I still have fingers crossed for that one.

 

[thedanj]

35 isn't bad for portraits on an APS-C, IMO. A bit short, sure, but one can step in a bit to compensate, and the 1.8 will blur out the background nicely. And for a little more length, the 50 1.8 STM is small enough not to be cumbersome on the M.

 

[MikeJ9116]

I bet these are going to be well performing lenses if the 22mm is any indication. It is nice to see Canon introducing a new camera and three lenses for the M line. It makes me feel like crawling out on that limb last August and buying an M3 might not have been a mistake after all.

 

[padmasana]

Mmmm. A bright 15mm. I'll definitely want that one. I adore 24mm on full frame, so this M lens will be spot-on for me.

 

[nnowak]

http://www.canonrumors.com/more-mentions-of-ef-m-prime-lenses-cr1/

Darn! I was hoping for something for portrait use such as a 50mm f1.8 or a fast 60mm macro.

I am assuming both of these rumored lenses will be pancakes and will lack IS.

35 i doubt will be a pancake. 15 they MAY be able to do .. it's within the range.

The 35 should be close. Adjusting for the difference in flange distance, the Samsung 30mm f2 would only be 5mm longer than the EF-M 22mm lens. The Sony 35mm f1.8 is 21mm longer than the EF-M 22mm, but it includes stabilization and in general, Sony lenses tend to be bigger than the Canon counterpart.

 

[nnowak]

35 isn't bad for portraits on an APS-C, IMO. A bit short, sure, but one can step in a bit to compensate, and the 1.8 will blur out the background nicely.

I have done portraits with the 11-22 before, but it doesn't mean that that lens is anywhere near my first choice

And for a little more length, the 50 1.8 STM is small enough not to be cumbersome on the M.

I am done with adapting EF lenses. For me, it is far less hassle to just use EF lenses natively on my 70D.

 

[Abu Mahendra]

This is f/2 @35mm on the Sigma 18-35 Art. The new EF-M lens best be just as good...

--
>> I am already lovin' the Canon EF 35L II lens! <<

 

[rrccad]

http://www.canonrumors.com/more-mentions-of-ef-m-prime-lenses-cr1/

Darn! I was hoping for something for portrait use such as a 50mm f1.8 or a fast 60mm macro.

I am assuming both of these rumored lenses will be pancakes and will lack IS.

35 i doubt will be a pancake. 15 they MAY be able to do .. it's within the range.

The 35 should be close. Adjusting for the difference in flange distance, the Samsung 30mm f2 would only be 5mm longer than the EF-M 22mm lens. The Sony 35mm f1.8 is 21mm longer than the EF-M 22mm, but it includes stabilization and in general, Sony lenses tend to be bigger than the Canon counterpart.

they aren't pancakes though, the nature of a pancake lens is atypically a variation of the tessar element design, which usually means that the focal distance and registration distance has to be close or you deal with the distortion characteristics,etc.

 

[meland]

http://www.canonrumors.com/more-mentions-of-ef-m-prime-lenses-cr1/

Darn! I was hoping for something for portrait use such as a 50mm f1.8 or a fast 60mm macro.

I am assuming both of these rumored lenses will be pancakes and will lack IS.

35 i doubt will be a pancake. 15 they MAY be able to do .. it's within the range.

The 35 should be close. Adjusting for the difference in flange distance, the Samsung 30mm f2 would only be 5mm longer than the EF-M 22mm lens. The Sony 35mm f1.8 is 21mm longer than the EF-M 22mm, but it includes stabilization and in general, Sony lenses tend to be bigger than the Canon counterpart.

they aren't pancakes though, the nature of a pancake lens is atypically a variation of the tessar element design, which usually means that the focal distance and registration distance has to be close or you deal with the distortion characteristics,etc.

 

[rrccad]

http://www.canonrumors.com/more-mentions-of-ef-m-prime-lenses-cr1/

Darn! I was hoping for something for portrait use such as a 50mm f1.8 or a fast 60mm macro.

I am assuming both of these rumored lenses will be pancakes and will lack IS.

35 i doubt will be a pancake. 15 they MAY be able to do .. it's within the range.

The 35 should be close. Adjusting for the difference in flange distance, the Samsung 30mm f2 would only be 5mm longer than the EF-M 22mm lens. The Sony 35mm f1.8 is 21mm longer than the EF-M 22mm, but it includes stabilization and in general, Sony lenses tend to be bigger than the Canon counterpart.

they aren't pancakes though, the nature of a pancake lens is atypically a variation of the tessar element design, which usually means that the focal distance and registration distance has to be close or you deal with the distortion characteristics,etc.

yes, but there's very little variation in the 6-8 element pancake design. you either deal with the fallout from the optical design in camera (like most the M43's do) or you don't use the pancake/tessar element layout. which means you're adding more elements for better corrections.

canon has limited in camera processing for bad optics so i suspect some designs simply don't cut it.

 

[rrccad]

35 isn't bad for portraits on an APS-C, IMO. A bit short, sure, but one can step in a bit to compensate, and the 1.8 will blur out the background nicely. And for a little more length, the 50 1.8 STM is small enough not to be cumbersome on the M.

for sure..

 

[speedync]

Awesome. That is EXACTLY what I was hoping for. Even said so in another thread How often does that happen?

 

[Ray Chen]

This is f/2 @35mm on the Sigma 18-35 Art. The new EF-M lens best be just as good...

Well, it will be smaller for sure. Despite what she said, size is important.