kenArchi Loc: Seal Beach, CA

Well, I got that wrong. Those zoom lenses are f6.3, not 5.6.

kenArchi Loc: Seal Beach, CA

I glad your all thoughts are simular to mine.
You're still going to use big lenses plus add an adaptor.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I've already answered this question. The current audience for the EOS-M cameras doesn't care about "fast" lenses.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The EOS-M is a larger format camera requiring larger, heavier APS-C format lenses. You would need an 18-55mm or similar focal range lens on it to capture the same angle of view as the Panny 12-35/2.8. I don't recall any lenses in that range with a fixed f/2.8 aperture. The fastest ones I can find are f/3.5 to f/5.6 variable max aperture. They're aimed at a different crowd.

The Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 is a pro-grade, weather-resistant lens. The new version II of it is rather expensive... $997 for the US warranty version. Version 1 can be had for about $620 used. The difference is mostly in the low temperature rating and compatibility with Dual IS II. The newer version has a little less flare, too.

I own the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 version 1... It is an excellent lens.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

How do you know this? The subject of this post is about fast glass for the the M...so there is an audience.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The ONLY mirrorless systems that save significant bulk and weight are Micro 4/3, from Olympus and Panasonic. The savings are in the lenses, not the bodies. An APS-C mirrorless system does not save significant bulk, and may add or subtract just a little bit of weight, depending on brand and model. The full frame system offerings from Sony are about the same weight and bulk as full frame dSLRs... Canons or Nikons. HOWEVER...

There were about 46 very clear reasons why I bought a Panasonic Lumix system. The top two:

• It is about 50% to 75% LIGHTER AND SMALLER than a dSLR system covering the same angles of view, depending on whether the dSLR is all APS-C or all full frame. I did my math on this before I switched (from BOTH Canon and Nikon). I can fit almost everything I need for most projects in a case that fits under most airline seats. (camera, three lenses, flash, two LED video lights, wireless mics, batteries, chargers, filters, mini-tripods, etc.)

• The Lumix GH4 and GH5 are aimed at still photographers who are also video photographers AND who need great audio with their video. I'm a training content developer. Much of my proprietary content is packaged as PDF, on-line eLearning, and DVD or online videos, so the same text, stills, and video images are created together. My GH4 lets me do that more efficiently than any other system. Switching from still camera to video camera is instantaneous. In fact, for some projects, I just capture 4K stills or extract still frames from video... no need to record the same thing twice.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Sometimes folks look for tools in the wrong place...

The EOS-M has a strange niche. I think Canon's selling hope, aspirations, brand, and an adequate travel camera for mostly outdoor daylight use with the M5/M6. It is what it is, which is an enthusiast's travel camera, not a pro tool. The same can be said for Nikon's 1 system. Yes, you can get adapters, but... they sort of defeat the purpose.

Of course, Micro 4/3 has a full range of bodies and lenses spanning all the way from trendy fashion statements to advanced and professional uses.

kenArchi Loc: Seal Beach, CA

Same reasons here Burk.
I have a D5500 APS. Replacing it with mirrorless aps cameras doesn't make sense to me.
So I now have an amazing OMD 10 and fast lenses.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM?

Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 HSM?

Adapters needed, of course... but still.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Audience for this thread is completely different from audience for these cameras. Canon management is quite competent; they know who purchases their cameras and what those people want; I was surprised at how long it took them to come up with a MILC with an EVF - either this was a blindspot for them, or else they were intentionally hobbling the M-series to help the Rebel series. They have a demonstrated ability, going back thirty years, to make top-notch modern lenses. I'm not a lens designer, so I cannot say this for certain, but I'm guessing their modern tools give them the ability to tweak a modern EF mount lens and come away with an EF-M mount fairly quickly. Right now, the M-series is clearly aimed at the Rebel series audience, and apparently they have some reason to think that this group either has limited interest in "fast" lenses or else that they can meet this interest via adapters for now. I don't know if they are right, but I'm curious to see how things develop. Clearly, because of how their lenses developed, Nikon has a tougher chore.

Meanwhile, I just pop some corn and watch. As a 70 year old Pentax user, there is little possibility any of this stuff will actually affect me.


added: Once you get away from normal lenses, weight is a non-issue. EVF and CDAF focus are the main issues.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Yes, I was looking at native M glass.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Grammieb1 Loc: New Orleans

The popularity of a product can depend on where you live. It is my understanding that the Canon M line is very popular in Japan. The white color being the most popular. I read this in a different photographic group discussion. I assume it is true. Bab