Which one is better the Canon EF-M 22mm or the Canon EF 40mm f/2.8? I am on a budget and I want to make sure I invest wisely.
2001618
never used the 40, but keep in mind you will have to use the adaptor with the 40 which will make the lens like 3x the size. on top of that the 22 is twice as fast at f2. unless you really want a 40 mm (and then you should buy the 50 1.4), the 22 is a much better lens for the SOS-m.
2001619
I would Say a 22 millimeter for average shooting just because there's a 1.6 crop with this camera so it shoots like a 35mm The 40mm is going to be 64mm so more of a telephoto lens. to be honest the 18 to 55 zoom lens Option would be good for this camera you can always buy the lens adapter and use normal canon glass if you already own a DSLR.
2001620
As a non-professional photographer but an avid picture taker, I think the EF-M 22mm suffices. I always prefer a native lens and don't plan on investing in a EF lens adapter so I am slightly biased. On the other hand, there is a great forum discussion about this here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3525549.
2001621
You'll need the ~$150 EOS-M mount adapter to use the EF 40mm on the EOS-M. Personally, I haven't found the 40mm f/2.8 to be anywhere near as satisfying as using the native-mount 22mm f/2. The 22mm is excellent as a general purpose lens (it achieves a moderately wide view good for museums, landscapes, people, etc.) and performs better in low-light than the 40mm.
2001622
Hi, Deirdre! They are for different cameras - EFM - only for new Canon EOS M camera and EF lenses - for wide range of EOS cameras. You can use EF lenses on EOS M camera with special adapter.
2227373
There are many choices depending on your budget. But of the 5 Canon lenses I own, the 17-40L is the one I use most. It has excellent optics, a wide zoom range, and is fast enough for most situations.
1346885
Yes, I have to agree with Henry. The 50mm f1.4 is more versatile in the long run. The single most useful point being that, depending on your camera model, you have in effect anything from a 65mm f1.4 to an 80mm f1.4. This falls ideally into the portrait lens range. It's a lens that I still use frequently, especially when using a film body. Both are first rate lenses with excellent sharpness & contrast, but I think that you'd find that the 50mm f1.4 would be used more often..
1041296
The 35mm f1.4 is amazing. The photos I gets are out of this world. I'm saving now for the 56mm f1.2. Prime lenses are pretty much all I work with.
204309
You won't go wrong with either lens, but since the 60mm will also give you a macro lens, you probably should make that your choice. C'mon, that's the one you really want anyhow, isn't it.
382374
I have both lenses and they are both pretty good. I probably like the 50mm a bit more than the 35mm. The real question for you to answer is what will I be my primary use for the lens ? Remember, we're shooting with a crop-sensor camera, so the lenses convert from a 35mm to a 52mm, and the 50mm converts to a 75mm lens. My recommendation for General Purpose Shooting would be to go with the 50mm ! A great bang for the buck and terrific bokeh !
591608
Both are fine. As to which is"preferred" that's up to you. I like the 20mm personally.
96399
I have both this 15-85mm lens, and the wonderful EF-S 10-22mm. Since getting the 15-85, I almost never use the 10-22, even though most of my photography is on the wide-angle side of normal. I recommend both lenses, but get the 15-85 first, and you may find, as I did, that it is very adequate all by itself. If you do need extreme wide-angle, however, by all means get the EF-S 10-22mm, which is excellent. Best, get both!
1150129
Thanks for your thoughts, Ken; I own the 24-105mm f/4L, but am looking for the best option for the extra focal length that makes portraits and candids really pop! As far as I can tell, even though the 200mm f/2.8 is well-built, people seem to have an almost religious zeal for the 135mm, making it all the more attractive.
2240581
Thank you Very much for your Help, what do you think about the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II and the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? If you had the money for only one general purpose lens, wich one will you chose?
100137
I love them both. I find the 40mm is best for indoors and people because it's just the right field of view for close quarters. The 24 is almost a wide angle lens in comparison.
1674522
I bought the 24-105 lens recently because I thought the IS would make up for my lack of a higher aperture in low-light situations. It does to an extent, but I have decided that I want the f/2.8 for other reasons. So I'm trying to sell my 24-105 so I can buy the 24-70. I do wish the 24-70 had IS, but it's really not necessary because it's just a faster lens. It really depends on your use. If you are using it for weddings, you may want to consider the 24-70 because of the faster focusing and better handling in low-light situations. If you are using it for a general walk-around lens, the 24-105 will do just fine. I love mine and I almost want to keep it and buy the 24-70, but I can't afford both right now and I need the 24-70 for my business. You can see some sample photos from the 24-105 at my website: www.sarakelley.net. Email me there if you want more input or have any questions.
1041294
I would recommend 23mm 1.4. The 35mm is a great lens, but 23mm is more useful as general purpose, also AF is faster and quieter. If you are not willing to spend for 23mm's cost, then 35mm 1.4 is next choice. Compare to 23mm 1.4, the AF of 35mm is slower, noisier. Also, 35mm is too narrow as general purpose while it's too short for portraits in my taste. I think 23mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.2 are great lenses to have, if you can afford them both.
624550
I have the 2.8L lens, and I love it, but I wish it had IS. In my opinion, the only real advantage of the 2.8 is its greater light gathering power, to shoot inside or in deep shadows. The f4 with the IS can do most everything you want, especially if you have a camera with a high ISO. I don't know of any differences in the glass.
405
Thanks everyone for your help. You've explained a lot and it really helps. After your explanations, I looked at my past photos. I'm thinking that maybe the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 will fill my needs. Thanks again.
648861
The answer really depends on your budget. I have the 18-135STM-which is also an amazing lens , but because of it's size and weight-I have the 40mm on my t5i all the time. I don't find the focal length to be a problem at all. The only thing shorter that I would consider is the new 35mm f2.0 IS which is a lot of money. The older none IS 35mm isn't as amazing as the 40mm. I tried them all out at the local camera shop. The combination of optical quality, construction, price, and size make this lens hard to walk away from. BTW, on the t5i, the f2.8 is plenty for doing hand held-no flash is terrible lighting.Hope this helps. The answer really depends on your budget. I have the 18-135STM-which is also an amazing lens , but because of it's size and weight-I have the 40mm on my t5i all the time. I don't find the focal length to be a problem at all. The only thing shorter that I would consider is the new 35mm f2.0 IS which is a lot of money. The older none IS 35mm isn't as amazing as the 40mm. I tried them all out at the local camera shop. The combination of optical quality, construction, price, and size make this lens hard to walk away from. BTW, on the t5i, the f2.8 is plenty for doing hand held-no flash is... » Read More The answer really depends on your budget. I have the 18-135STM-which is also an amazing lens , but because of it's size and weight-I have the 40mm on my t5i all the time. I don't find the focal length to be a problem at all. The only thing shorter that I would consider is the new 35mm f2.0 IS which is a lot of money. The older none IS 35mm isn't as amazing as the 40mm. I tried them all out at the local camera shop. The combination of optical quality, construction, price, and size make this lens hard to walk away from. BTW, on the t5i, the f2.8 is plenty for doing hand held-no flash is terrible lighting.Hope this helps. « Show Less
11422
My suggestions would be first the Canon 24-105mm F4.0 IS L and if the price is too much, go for the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM.