Is my EOS M 15-45 good?

[Jason D]

There are some discussions on the quality issues of this lens. Some people have good copies and some have bad copies, etc. However, this is a cheap kit lens. I am not sure what we can expect from it. One thing for sure, we can't expect L lenses image quality from it.

I took the same brick wall using F3.5, F5.6 and F8. They look pretty decent to me, but this is the only kit lens I have. I don't know how it compares to the others. Can people have this lens comment please?






15mm F3.5






15mm F5.6






15mm F8

 

[gium]

Looking at your sample pictures, your lens is fine. Wide open, the middle is really sharp and left and right are equal in terms of being not that sharp as in the middle.
at f/5.6 it looks the left is maybe just a tiny bit sharper than the right, but it's fine. At f/8 no issues at all.

Don't let all the internet horror stories get to you.

 

[DonA2]

Not really a pure scientific test but yes it seems to be about what this kit lens is capable of. Mine is very similar for IQ. It's a neat little go anywhere lens that has an acceptable zoom range.

I added the 55/ 200 lens which is excellent for it's size and reach. Still tempted to try the 11/ 22 for it's wider end and good IQ but am somewhat adverse to lens changes. Then there is that 22 to 55 hole. I do hope Canon gets on with a proper 'all-in-one' zoom.

For a lens test the brick wall is fine but I would get in a bit closer to avoid the snow drift. Also to be accurate a tripod, 2 sec.timer with IS off, if not already done here.

 

[Fjzk]

I think the 18-150 is a pretty decent ‘all-in-one’.

 

[gregorjeric]

I plan to get 32mm for between 11-22 and 55-200.

 

[Asla]

Hi!

Looks pretty good for me. But are you happy with it's sharpness yourself? I guess that's what matters most...

A s l a

 

[Andy01]

The right side is softer than the left side, and there is a significant difference between the centre and the edges/corners.

Compared with many examples of this lens, it does not appear to be bad though.

I would suggest that a 18-150mm (at least my copy) would be noticeably better though.

Colin

 

[KevinRA]

The 45mm end is where my lens is not as good - had 2 copies (as my first M6II had a problem and was a kit). The 2nd lens in particular seems great at 15-28 but less so in the tele end with 45mm the weakest. But since offered only £45 (~ $60) not worth selling as a useful spare if nothing else..

You might just want to do the same at the 45mm end.

Another test is the 45 degree angle test - I had to send back a EF-S 15-85mm I bought 2nd hand as noticeably decentered focussing closer on LHS and back on RHS vs the centre. Was hoping it would beat my 15-45 - but it didn't in this copy....

 

[gium]

The right side is softer than the left side, and there is a significant difference between the centre and the edges/corners.

Compared with many examples of this lens, it does not appear to be bad though.

I would suggest that a 18-150mm (at least my copy) would be noticeably better though.

Colin

15mm f/3.5 has always been the weakest spot of this lens. As the review on optical limits also notes:

"The resolution figures of the Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 STM IS are quite decent. The weakest spot is at 15mm @ f/3.5. While the centre quality is great, the outer image field is soft. However, stopping down to f/5.6-8 boosts the sharpness to a very good quality across the image field.

...

The centering quality of the tested sample was Okay (albeit not great)"

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/972-canon_m1545_3563?start=1

And that is basically how the 15-45 is. It's not perfect, but ok. Price performance wise I give it 3,5 out of 5 stars, because it's a really small and practical lens with always good center sharpness. Try to avoid shooting at 15mm wide open when you need corner to corner sharpness and everything will work out ok.

The 18-150mm is a nice lens as well. If people need a lens for their M camera I usually recommend that one as well, together with the 22, 32 and 11-22.

 

[Photato]

I can tell you forgot to turn off Software Corrections.

Most if not all M lenses because of their compact size (small diameter) are compromised with pronounced Vignetting.

This kit Lens has plenty of Vignetting resulting in darker corners or noisy corners after correction.

The 15-45 is sharper at the wide end than the Tele end.

If you think of it as a fun and portable 15-30mm lens with IS then you'll be happier with it.

The older 18-55 kit lens is softer than your newer kit lens but much sharper at the Tele end, also because it has larger diameter lens elements, is heavier but suffer less from vignetting.

 

[Jason D]

Looking at your sample pictures, your lens is fine. Wide open, the middle is really sharp and left and right are equal in terms of being not that sharp as in the middle.
at f/5.6 it looks the left is maybe just a tiny bit sharper than the right, but it's fine. At f/8 no issues at all.

Don't let all the internet horror stories get to you.

Excellent. Thanks!

 

[Jason D]

Not really a pure scientific test but yes it seems to be about what this kit lens is capable of. Mine is very similar for IQ. It's a neat little go anywhere lens that has an acceptable zoom range.

I added the 55/ 200 lens which is excellent for it's size and reach. Still tempted to try the 11/ 22 for it's wider end and good IQ but am somewhat adverse to lens changes. Then there is that 22 to 55 hole. I do hope Canon gets on with a proper 'all-in-one' zoom.

For a lens test the brick wall is fine but I would get in a bit closer to avoid the snow drift. Also to be accurate a tripod, 2 sec.timer with IS off, if not already done here.

Thanks. I just want to get a general sense if mine is on par with the others. I don't want to go through the trouble to send it back to Canon if it is not too bad. Thanks again.

 

[Jason D]

Hi!

Looks pretty good for me. But are you happy with it's sharpness yourself? I guess that's what matters most...

A s l a

I am happy with it as long as it is not worse than most of them. I think it is very decent. Specially in the center, it is sharper than my EF-S 18-135 STM and Tamron 17-15 Gen1. Also it is sharper than a Sigma 17-50 F2.8 that I tried in a camera shore.

 

[Jason D]

The right side is softer than the left side, and there is a significant difference between the centre and the edges/corners.

Compared with many examples of this lens, it does not appear to be bad though.

I would suggest that a 18-150mm (at least my copy) would be noticeably better though.

Colin

The whole reason that I bought this kit is it was on deep discount, with a 80D sense and very small. I was thinking of Sony RX100 or something like that. However, to me, the M100 is much better.

I have a 90D, which is my main camera. I will bring the M100 when I want something small. I don't think I will invest more on EOS M. Another thing is that all tel end of the lenses are F6.3 and there isn't any F2.8 zoom, which makes me feel that EOS-M is a third class citizen. I doubt that Canon will invest more on the EOS-M.

 

[Jason D]

The 45mm end is where my lens is not as good - had 2 copies (as my first M6II had a problem and was a kit). The 2nd lens in particular seems great at 15-28 but less so in the tele end with 45mm the weakest. But since offered only £45 (~ $60) not worth selling as a useful spare if nothing else..

You might just want to do the same at the 45mm end.

Another test is the 45 degree angle test - I had to send back a EF-S 15-85mm I bought 2nd hand as noticeably decentered focussing closer on LHS and back on RHS vs the centre. Was hoping it would beat my 15-45 - but it didn't in this copy....

This one is 45mm end. I think it is not bad too. What do you think?

Can you explain how to shoot at 45 degree to test decentered focusing?

 

[Jason D]

I can tell you forgot to turn off Software Corrections.

Most if not all M lenses because of their compact size (small diameter) are compromised with pronounced Vignetting.

This kit Lens has plenty of Vignetting resulting in darker corners or noisy corners after correction.

The 15-45 is sharper at the wide end than the Tele end.

If you think of it as a fun and portable 15-30mm lens with IS then you'll be happier with it.

The older 18-55 kit lens is softer than your newer kit lens but much sharper at the Tele end, also because it has larger diameter lens elements, is heavier but suffer less from vignetting.

My copy is very sharp at the tele end too. I did some head test shots. It was surprising sharp.

 

[Andy01]

The 45mm end is where my lens is not as good - had 2 copies (as my first M6II had a problem and was a kit). The 2nd lens in particular seems great at 15-28 but less so in the tele end with 45mm the weakest. But since offered only £45 (~ $60) not worth selling as a useful spare if nothing else..

You might just want to do the same at the 45mm end.

Another test is the 45 degree angle test - I had to send back a EF-S 15-85mm I bought 2nd hand as noticeably decentered focussing closer on LHS and back on RHS vs the centre. Was hoping it would beat my 15-45 - but it didn't in this copy....

This one is 45mm end. I think it is not bad too. What do you think?

Can you explain how to shoot at 45 degree to test decentered focusing?

IMO this lens is definitely decentred. The lower left corner shows the grass as mush, and the lower right is distinctly better. The difference of the fence is there as well, but not as pronounced.

Colin

 

[gium]

The 45mm end is where my lens is not as good - had 2 copies (as my first M6II had a problem and was a kit). The 2nd lens in particular seems great at 15-28 but less so in the tele end with 45mm the weakest. But since offered only £45 (~ $60) not worth selling as a useful spare if nothing else..

You might just want to do the same at the 45mm end.

Another test is the 45 degree angle test - I had to send back a EF-S 15-85mm I bought 2nd hand as noticeably decentered focussing closer on LHS and back on RHS vs the centre. Was hoping it would beat my 15-45 - but it didn't in this copy....

This one is 45mm end. I think it is not bad too. What do you think?

Can you explain how to shoot at 45 degree to test decentered focusing?

IMO this lens is definitely decentred. The lower left corner shows the grass as mush, and the lower right is distinctly better. The difference of the fence is there as well, but not as pronounced.

Colin

And the topleft is then again a bit sharper then the topright side. In the middle the left and right side are equal imo. I believe the centering is ok, but not 100% ok. So decentered to some agree yes.

 

[gium]

I can tell you forgot to turn off Software Corrections.

Most if not all M lenses because of their compact size (small diameter) are compromised with pronounced Vignetting.

This kit Lens has plenty of Vignetting resulting in darker corners or noisy corners after correction.

The 15-45 is sharper at the wide end than the Tele end.

If you think of it as a fun and portable 15-30mm lens with IS then you'll be happier with it.

The older 18-55 kit lens is softer than your newer kit lens but much sharper at the Tele end, also because it has larger diameter lens elements, is heavier but suffer less from vignetting.

My copy is very sharp at the tele end too. I did some head test shots. It was surprising sharp.

Same here for me. Unlike the wide end, the tele end is sharp from corner to corner even wide open. This is consistent with the copy that was tested at opticallimits.

 

[KevinRA]

The 45mm end is where my lens is not as good - had 2 copies (as my first M6II had a problem and was a kit). The 2nd lens in particular seems great at 15-28 but less so in the tele end with 45mm the weakest. But since offered only £45 (~ $60) not worth selling as a useful spare if nothing else..

You might just want to do the same at the 45mm end.

Another test is the 45 degree angle test - I had to send back a EF-S 15-85mm I bought 2nd hand as noticeably decentered focussing closer on LHS and back on RHS vs the centre. Was hoping it would beat my 15-45 - but it didn't in this copy....

This one is 45mm end. I think it is not bad too. What do you think?

Can you explain how to shoot at 45 degree to test decentered focusing?

Looks, just based on one test to be soft in left hand corner vs the right hand corner (which is quite good). Look like further away / top left is a bit better perhaps than top right - looking at the trees for example. So would say some decentring or more accurately tilt here.

I showed with my 15-85 the effect by photographing a large newspaper on the floor, shooting at a 45 degree angle down to the centre of it. What I saw was the plane of best focus shifting front on one side and back on the other.

I also did tests where I took a flat object and focus on the left side, where objects place also at centre and right side. Where focussed on the left side, the left side was sharp and the right soft. Then doing the opposite, the right side was sharp and left soft.

Article here shows a common problem - key is whether it shows up in photos, which often is does not. Problem with my 15-85 was even at f/9 it was often leading to blur on one side, so had to go back... (But my 15-45 I think is good enough even not perfect).

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/20...s-ii-copy-to-copy-variation-and-lens-testing/