 |
| Canon EOS M50 with 18-150mm lens |
Within any price range one of the challenges for lens designers is to figure out the balance between versatility and quality which will best meet the needs of the target buyer group.
The EOS-M system occupies a market position below the EOS-R system in size and price.
Within the size/price constraints of the M system there are lenses spanning the spectrum from vey high quality to very high versatility.
The quality/versatility relationship can be represented in simplified form as seen in the quad box below.
High quality High versatility (High price) | Low quality High Versatility (Medium price) |
High quality Low versatility (Medium price) | Low quality Low versatility (Low price) |
Due to the physical constraints of lens design and the laws of physics the highest quality lenses in any given price range tend to be primes (fixed focal length) while the most versatile lenses tend to be zooms.
Of the zooms those with a small focal length range have the potential for higher quality than those with a great focal length range.
Most Canon made EF-M lenses (there are only 7 of them currently in production) cluster around the center of the quad box diagram above.
None of them is classed as weather resistant.
None of them comes with a lens hood. I use all my EF-M lenses without a hood or filter with very few problems.
Image stabiliser
In general lenses with a stabiliser are more versatile than those without (given that there are no EOS-M bodies with in-body stabiliser at the time of writing) particularly in low light.
Only the 22mm f2 and the 32mm f1.4 are unstabilised.
Sample variation
In the 50 years I have been using interchangeable lens cameras I have found sample variation to be an issue for all brands in all price ranges. However from my own experience and from reports by reviewers and users on forums it is evident that the problem is more prevalent with budget zooms.
The EF-M lenses which appear to be most affected by sample variation are:
* 15-45mm. Almost every buyer of an EOS-M camera since 2015 has one of these generating many reports, quite a few of which are negative. I have bought and used four of these and rate one of them as good.
* 55-200mm. I have read several reviews of this lens reporting unfavourably on image quality, plus several giving a more positive report. My copy is not great, not terrible.
* 18-150mm. There are fewer negative reports about this lens but I had one badly decentered, repaired under warranty by Canon Australia. My current copy does a creditable job at all focal lengths.
Rankings
These are my personal rankings of the seven lenses for quality and versatility. They are relevant only to good copies.
These are intended to be most relevant to general hand held photography.
EOS-M owners with specific usage requirements may well have a different take on what is most suitable for that requirement.
Quality | Versatility |
32mm f1.4 | 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 |
(28mm f3.5 macro ?) | 15-45mm f3.5-6.3 |
22mm f2 | 22mm f2 |
11-22mm f4-5.6 | 11-22mm f4-5.6 |
18-150mm f3.5-6.3 | (28mm f3.5 macro ?) |
15-45mm f3.5-6.3 | 32mm f1.4 |
55-200mm f4.5-6.3 | 55-200mm f4.5-6.3 |
Brief notes on each lens
* 32mm f1.4.
This lens is extraordinarily sharp on the M6.2 and is still excellent on the M50.
It is not affected by shutter shock with the mechanical shutter on the M6.2.
With a suitable subject and optimal lighting and capture technique this lens can render amazing amounts of fine detail in output photos.
Downsides are: no stabiliser, slow autofocus and a proneness to flare.
Not only is the AF often slow it seems to think it is playing the first four notes of Beethoven’s 5th symphony over and over but instead of da-da-da-DAH it sounds like di-di-di-BEEP.
I have also found that when using wide apertures I have to be very careful with the position and size of the AF area so as to locate focus exactly where it is wanted. This is not a fault just a comment on the need for careful technique with ultra sharp lenses which have a shallow depth of field.
* 22mm f2.
This is arguably the most versatile EF-M prime. It has been in the catalogue right from the start of the M series in 2012 and is a firm favourite with M system users for good reason.
The focal length is useful for a wide range of uses, including street, documentary or landscape.
It is extremely compact and is remarkably inexpensive considering it can deliver clear sharp pictures right from f2.
If focusses faster than the 32mm.
It does not suffer from shutter shock on the M6.2.
I prefer the 22mm on an M6.2 or M50 body to any of the much more expensive fixed prime lens compacts available.
The only downside is the lack of stabiliser.
(* 28mm f3.5 IS macro: I will add comment on this lens when I can get hold of one)
* 11-22mm
This is the sharpest zoom in the catalogue. It covers a very handy superwide to medium wide field of view, is compact, takes a standard 55mm filter, is decently resistant to flare, is stabilised and very modestly priced.
It represents very good value for money compared to superwide zooms for any other system.
There is substantial barrel distortion at the wide end but this is correctable in post processing.
* 18-150mm
This is my most frequently used lens. The focal length range is very versatile and the optical quality good enough for the great majority of purposes. It works best outdoors throughout the zoom range but f3.5 plus the stabiliser make it entirely usable indoors or in low light at the wide end of the zoom.
At around 60mm focal length the horizontal field of view at minimum focus distance is about 60mm which gives this lens a useful semi macro capability.
* 15-45mm
This is the standard kit zoom which can deliver decent results if you get a good copy.
I suspect many enthusiast M system users would be very pleased if Canon was to introduce a higher quality standard zoom.
* 55-200mm
This lens struggles for relevance on several fronts.
The optical quality is not wonderful but adequate if one’s printing ambitions are modest.
Versatility is also not wonderful as the 18-150mm is much more versatile and not much shorter at the long end.
The M system lacks a convincing tele zoom. In the absence of one users must fall back on various EF or EF-S lenses with adapters. But all these options are quite large and rather unwieldy on M bodies.
I use the EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM Mk2. This is a good lens on EF, RF or EF-M bodies but a made-for-EF-M 70-300mm could be smaller, lighter and a better match for any EOS-M body.
Recommendations
I use and recommend the 22mm f2, 32mm f1.4, 11-22mm and 18-150mm.
These lenses are compact, light and together cover the range from superwide to moderate telephoto with the two primes providing a very high level of sharpness when required.
The 15-45mm and 55-200mm rarely find a place in my camera bag.
Some users have reported good results with these two budget zooms, others have had a less satisfactory experience.