 |
|
|
Phil UKNet
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2007
Location: Thailand
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 30, 2015
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $215.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Small form factor, light, fast and accurate AF, great image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS
|
|
The general advice on all Internet forums is that fast, prime lenses are preferable to zoom lenses. However, since obtaining my EOS M system I have used the two zooms (11-22mm and 18-55mm) far more than this fast, prime lens. Both zooms have IS, the focal length is more flexible, and I can't detect any noticeable drop in quality.
However, the EF-M 22mm is still very useful if bokeh is required or if shooting in low light conditions.
It's also very handy when I want to travel light and want the smallest possible EOS M configuration. I can carry this lens and the EOS M body in a small lens pouch designed for a 100mm lens, which fastens to my belt. This is much more convenient than the small LowePro shoulder case I use when carrying the EOS M and a zoom lens.
The other good thing about the EOS M system is that EF-M lenses aren't excessively expensive, unlike some EF lenses, and it doesn't break the bank to own all of the EF-M lenses. I have three and they are all useful at different times.
There is no IS. This isn't a big problem, but after using the EF-M 11-22mm IS it is surprising how useful IS can be on short focal length lenses.
For some more thoughts and observations, and also some sample photos see my website:
http://phil.uk.net/photography/canon_EF-M_22F2_STM_pancake.html
|
|
 Mar 30, 2015
|
|
shintajay
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 19, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 20, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $90.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, small, good picture quality wide open
|
|
Cons:
|
Slower focus. Noisy focus motor, can hear it hunting when taking video. Hood uselessly small.
|
|
|
Purchased the M for travel only. Use my 5D and 7D for local stuff with a host of lenses. When mounted on M, form size is so small it looks like a point and shoot. After crop factor of 35 its more usefull than a 50 for landscape and general travel. Picture is quite good at 2.0 and really settles at 4. At F4 the pictures looks the same as my 24-105 at F4. One thing that I hate is the Canon hood for this lenses. Its so small its almost useless.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2014
|
|
noncho
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 23, 2012
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 1
|
|
|
Mar 7, 2014
|
|
WT21
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 740
|
|
Review Date: Dec 3, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, inexpensive, close focusing, creamy bokeh, sharp in the center wide open, and just gets better stopped down
|
|
Cons:
|
Slower focusing, unit focusing construction (entire unit moves in and out on focus). Extends and retracts on power up/down, so feel like I need to be careful with it.
|
|
This lens is very surprising, and it's worth getting the M just to use it, if you like the FL.
The lens is very useable wide open. It's small and lightweight. Frankly, IMO it supplants the nifty fifty as "best bang for the buck" by a wide margin. I would say I enjoy shooting with this lens more than the 50/1.4 or the 85/1.8. Better output, smaller. The only penalties you pay may be build quality and focus speed.
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5505/11172648923_1c72e1a759_c.jpg
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3674/9466188703_3c7152675d_c.jpg
|
|
|
Dec 3, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
4
|
22228
|
Mar 30, 2015
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$133.75
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.50
|
9.75
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
;)
