Canon EOS M Series Cameras

dave_bass5 said:
I don’t do much macro, but when I do its with my 24-70 f/4 and always at the 70mm end, So a short macro wouldn’t be my first choice of focal length.
Click to expand...

I have a sigma 105, as much as I like results from it, I just don't seem to enjoy using it, I find it far to heavy, wished I had saved my money and not brought it. So it may go in part ex.
 
I enjoy doing macro and have various dedicated lenses of different focal lengths ranging from the Pentax 35mm to the Sigma 180mm. The 35mm gets used very rarely as the working distance is too restrictive for bugs, it is more useful for flowers etc and 180mm is perfect for butterfly etc. Around 100mm is a happy medium and I would happily buy a small lightweight version with built in ringlight should Canon make one for the M.
 
I had the 180 a few years ago mike and it’s really a excellent focal length but far to heavy and unwieldy for hand holding , the 150 mm I have now feels about right and with added o.s should hopefully be a keeper once stuff is about again
 
michael23 said:
I have a sigma 105, as much as I like results from it, I just don't seem to enjoy using it, I find it far to heavy, wished I had saved my money and not brought it. So it may go in part ex.
Click to expand...
A long (100mm+) macro lens is a lens I’ve often wanted, but I’ve never got around to getting one as I don’t really buy lenses just for one thing, and I know I wouldn’t use a 100mm lens much for other things. That’s why I love my 24-70. It gives me macro when I want it, while still given get me a good general zoom. Not sure its a good lens for crop cameras though. Ive used it a few times on my 80D but it seems awkward.
 
I have an EF 100mm f/2.8L, but haven't used it on the M. Must give it a go.
 
Phil V said:
In your opinion?

The sales figures tell a different story still.

So it’s not the end yet! It’ll happen though, as Dave says.

I just wish Canon would put some effort into the lenses. They seem to believe that most mirrorless users prioritise size over IQ, and that any mirrorless buyers who want to use decent lenses are happy to use EF lenses with the adaptor. I just wonder whether they’re right. Is the market for quality EF-m lenses big enough to justify the R&D?

There’s plenty here would like to buy more primes in the 22mm mould, (30 and 55) but are we statistically significant? Fuji and the M4/3 sales figures suggest there’s a market.
Click to expand...


Not sure if this has been mentioned before but it may be another prime lens to add to the list.

http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-m-32mm-f-1-4-announcement-coming-for-photokina-cr2-cr3/
 
Mike.P said:
Have to say I don't have a problem hand holding the 180mm.

I seem to remember not so long ago you saying you were fine hand holding the 150-600mm sport which is a lot heavier. ?
Click to expand...
yes I do mike but in that case its a matter of balance with a 1d3 on the back ,with a 180 macro coupled with a eos.m I would think it was front heavy
 
Phil V said:
We can only live in hope, this would leave me 2/3 on the way to a sensible sized M kit, the 85 with the adaptor isn’t that incongruous.
If it’s a 1.4 it’ll probably necessitate me selling a lens, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, I have too much gear.
Click to expand...

Such a lens release with quality performance would be an instant replacement for my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 ART! Another prime without gimmicks (LED lights) a bonus.
 
michael23 said:
I shall certainly be giving the m50 a good look at the photography show next week.

On the thought of primes, a dedicated efm 85 would be nice.

What are peoples thoughts on the 28mm 3.5 macro?
Click to expand...

It is a compromise lens. Not particularly sharp, has the LED lights which do a bit of work in Macro but the d.o.f is very shallow. I got it for recording my stamp collection. Rarely gets used these days and, for prime in that range, I use a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 AaRT which will be moved on IF Canon release s decent fast 32mm M mount prime as mentioned earlier in the thread.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
The 55-250 STM is a gem on the M5, I am not comfortable with it on the M6.

Steve
Click to expand...

Oh' why would that be, the M5 M6 effectively same camera.
 
dave_bass5 said:
A long (100mm+) macro lens is a lens I’ve often wanted, but I’ve never got around to getting one as I don’t really buy lenses just for one thing, and I know I wouldn’t use a 100mm lens much for other things. That’s why I love my 24-70. It gives me macro when I want it, while still given get me a good general zoom. Not sure its a good lens for crop cameras though. Ive used it a few times on my 80D but it seems awkward.
Click to expand...

I had always wanted one, as I couldn't afford the 180 or 150 macros. I also wanted a portrait lens as well, so settled on it. I find it to awkward a focal length on apsc. Strange as I really enjoyed using a 75mm 1.8 on an olympus em1 (150mm equivalent).

Hugh Jarse said:
It is a compromise lens. Not particularly sharp, has the LED lights which do a bit of work in Macro but the d.o.f is very shallow. I got it for recording my stamp collection. Rarely gets used these days and, for prime in that range, I use a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 AaRT which will be moved on IF Canon release s decent fast 32mm M mount prime as mentioned earlier in the thread.
Click to expand...

Thanks, it was a general wondering, trying to decide which way to put my money.
 
dave_bass5 said:
Canon 24-70 f/4 IS. This lens has all but replaced my 24-70 f/2.8 mkii as my general shooting lens.
Click to expand...

Just had a look, macro mode of 0.7x magnification is good for a zoom lens, not quite 1:1 but enough for most purposes. May have to invest in one as it would make a decent walk around lens in that case.
 
Last edited:
GeeJay57 said:
I have an EF 100mm f/2.8L, but haven't used it on the M. Must give it a go.
Click to expand...

This is the lens i keep almost buying. In fact I also nearly swapped my 135L for one a while ago, but i just dont think ill do as much macro as i hoped..
 
GeeJay57 said:
I have an EF 100mm f/2.8L, but haven't used it on the M. Must give it a go.
Click to expand...

....That's the lens I use on my M5 for insects and sometimes also with the x1.4 Kenko (the Canon Extender doesn't physically fit), so @140mm as an option.

Some examples on Flickr : https://www.flickr.com/photos/114775606@N07/albums/72157683996949495/with/34852591351/

I also have recently bought a Canon 24-70mm F/4L which has a 'Macro' switch but bought it for general photography. This year's insect season hasn't really started yet.
 
Last edited:
Mike.P said:
Just had a look, macro mode of 0.7x magnification is good for a zoom lens, not quite 1:1 but enough for most purposes. May have to invest in one as it would make a decent walk around lens in that case.
Click to expand...

Ive not owned a macro lens before, and didn’t know how much I’d use it so couldn’t justify a dedicated macro lens. At the same time i was wondering if i could scale down my 24-70 f/2.8 mkii a bit, as its quite big and heavy compared to some of my other lenses. The f/4 just seemed to fit all the criteria. I find IQ to be more than good enough, macro mode is fun to use (although i know there is much better out there) and its smaller and lighter than my f/2.8 Plus, having IS means i can shoot down to about 1/5 hand held, so I’m getting lower ISO settings than I would when shooting static scenes with my f/2.8. Being able to get just that bit closer, without actualy going macro is very useful for me.
It’s funny but when thislens was released I really couldnt figure out why Canon did this, it seemed to sit in the same area as the 24-105 and 24-70 f/2.8, so to me seemed pointless. Funny how opinions change.
I still wouldnt use it much on a M or crop camera, its hardly been on my 80D since i got it, but i will definitely try it when i grey my M50.
 
tourerjim said:
Oh' why would that be, the M5 M6 effectively same camera.
Click to expand...

Handling - pure and simple

I use the 22mm on the M6 90% of the tine and the 11-22 otherwise. At this time, for me, the 22, 11-22 and 55-200 are the best of the M lenses.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Handling - pure and simple

I use the 22mm on the M6 90% of the tine and the 11-22 otherwise. At this time, for me, the 22, 11-22 and 55-200 are the best of the M lenses.
Click to expand...

Aww ok im with ya now, that's why i cant bring meself to sell my eos M & M3 as i now stick with the 22mm on the M & 10-20mm on the M3, M6 I use with all my other lenses.
 
dave_bass5 said:
Ive not owned a macro lens before, and didn’t know how much I’d use it so couldn’t justify a dedicated macro lens. At the same time i was wondering if i could scale down my 24-70 f/2.8 mkii a bit, as its quite big and heavy compared to some of my other lenses. The f/4 just seemed to fit all the criteria. I find IQ to be more than good enough, macro mode is fun to use (although i know there is much better out there) and its smaller and lighter than my f/2.8 Plus, having IS means i can shoot down to about 1/5 hand held, so I’m getting lower ISO settings than I would when shooting static scenes with my f/2.8. Being able to get just that bit closer, without actualy going macro is very useful for me.
It’s funny but when thislens was released I really couldnt figure out why Canon did this, it seemed to sit in the same area as the 24-105 and 24-70 f/2.8, so to me seemed pointless. Funny how opinions change.
I still wouldnt use it much on a M or crop camera, its hardly been on my 80D since i got it, but i will definitely try it when i grey my M50.
Click to expand...
out off interest why don't you like the 24-79 f4 on your crop camera?
 
niko said:
out off interest why don't you like the 24-79 f4 on your crop camera?
Click to expand...
Well its not as wide as my 18-135, nor as long. Ive never felt really comfortable with a lens starting at 24mm on a crop camera. Obviously the IQ is great, but it seems like its just sitting in the middle of the range, and losing out at each end.
I really only use my 80D (or any crop) as travelling light/holiday camera, so in those circumstances i want as light as possible, and with little need to swap lenses.
 
dave_bass5 said:
Well its not as wide as my 18-135, nor as long. Ive never felt really comfortable with a lens starting at 24mm on a crop camera. Obviously the IQ is great, but it seems like its just sitting in the middle of the range, and losing out at each end.
I really only use my 80D (or any crop) as travelling light/holiday camera, so in those circumstances i want as light as possible, and with little need to swap lenses.
Click to expand...
thank you mate
 
niko said:
out off interest why don't you like the 24-79 f4 on your crop camera?
Click to expand...

The 24-70 zoom is (personal view) a bloody horrible zoom length on a crop camera, the wide end isn’t really wide, the long end is nearly long enough for a medium tele.
 
i must admit i take more shots at the tele end of a 24-70 than the wide so a start at a "sort of 35mm at the wide end" isnt really an issue for me. it seems i am in the minority- mind you nothing new there:p:D
 
niko said:
i must admit i take more shots at the tele end of a 24-70 than the wide so a start at a "sort of 35mm at the wide end" isnt really an issue for me. it seems i am in the minority- mind you nothing new there:p:D
Click to expand...
Loads of people use a 24-70on crop, including my Mrs for years, i found it terrible though.

And I wouldn’t put one anywhere near my M5, a huge lens of the wrong length on a lovely little camera.
 
Last edited:
niko said:
i must admit i take more shots at the tele end of a 24-70 than the wide so a start at a "sort of 35mm at the wide end" isnt really an issue for me. it seems i am in the minority- mind you nothing new there:p:D
Click to expand...

I’m much more a tele end guy, my walk around lens on my 5D4 is normally my 70-300L. Saying that i just find 24mm a bit too cramped on a crop. I never really got on with the 24-105 on my crops for the same reason.

Phil V said:
Loads of people use a 24-70on crop, including my Mrs for years, i found it terrible though.

And I wouldn’t put one anywhere near my M5, a huge lens of the wrong length on a lovely little camera.
Click to expand...

Agree, although the 24-70f/4 is quite a bit smaller and lighter than the f/2.8 verisons.
 
Phil V said:
Loads of people use a 24-70on crop, including my Mrs for years, i found it terrible though.

And I wouldn’t put one anywhere near my M5, a huge lens of the wrong length on a lovely little camera.
Click to expand...
agree on the m5/6 the little primes would fit much better, mind you i havent seen one in the flesh yet, keep meaning to take a trip out to play with one
 
Got my 55-250 is STM Lens tonight to go on the M3 .hope to test it tomorrow but first impressions are good and under ninety quid with hood and filter.

Best thing is I bought it from the son of a dear friend who passed away in January ,and he is now selling off all dads stuff ,we let it go through e.bay to ensure he got the best price . So I now have a lasting memento of a dear departed friend
 
Last edited:
the black fox said:
Got my 55-250 is STM Lens tonight to go on the M3 .hope to test it tomorrow but first impressions are good and under ninety quid with hood and filter.

Best thing is I bought it from the son of a dear friend who passed away in January ,and he is now selling off all dads stuff ,we let it go through e.bay to ensure he got the best price . So I now have a lasting memento of a dear departed friend
Click to expand...

If my experience is anything to go by, you will enjoy it. Just one of those ‘wonder’ lenses.... ie “Wonder why I took as long to get one”?
 
Hugh Jarse said:
We can but hope

Sadly

Canon EF-S 35 mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Camera Lens - Black https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B06Y2LQCP3/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_szNQAb5QJA095


Canon EF-M 28 mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM Lens https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01FH4H30I/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_mBNQAb43Z9XNV

Suggests that a minor trend might develop.....
Click to expand...

Cant see them using f1.4 for a macro lens, seems a bit pointless?
I suspect they will need too large a front element to be able to fit LED lights, but who knows until official details are released?
 
Steve B said:
Cant see them using f1.4 for a macro lens, seems a bit pointless?
I suspect they will need too large a front element to be able to fit LED lights, but who knows until official details are released?
Click to expand...

The EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake has a tiny front element and is still bright and fast. If they can use the same drive in quality and size, no IS (let the camera pick up that role) then, hopefully it will be as useful as the 22mm. A 35mm pancake M would suit me perfectly.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
The EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake has a tiny front element and is still bright and fast. If they can use the same drive in quality and size, no IS (let the camera pick up that role) then, hopefully it will be as useful as the 22mm. A 35mm pancake M would suit me perfectly.
Click to expand...

If it is a 32mm f1.4 the nodal aperture must have a diameter of 32/1.4 = 22mm so the front element must be at least that diameter and probably slightly larger. So there's no way it can be as small as the 22mm lens. Still an interesting development and a step in the right direction for Canon - we need more fast primes!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top