Any reviews or impressions of the EF-M 18-150mm yet?

AvTvM

EOS 5D MK IV
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
like the 1st pic painting the west. great light! where is it? what mountain is that? thx!
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,072
141
Lens actually came today (!), initial thoughts:

- Weight is very noticeable - unlike other EF-M lenses, this one has somewhat of a heft to it
- The M10/18-150 combo is RIGHT at the limit of what you can stuff into a Dashpoint 30 bag (it's TIGHT)
- For some reason I don't feel the same sense of solidness and durability when I hold this one compared to the others, especially the 11-22
- Great range - FINALLY the M system has a multi-purpose lens. That said, see next point - other, smaller lenses may still be better for certain uses
- On-board flash casts significant shadow at 18mm (no surprise there, really) - with a regular size filter attached, one must zoom to 35mm to get rid of this shadow. Flash selfies won't really work with this lens, and you must also consider this when taking low-light, wide-angle shots (think indoor portraits or group shots). UPDATE: Even without a filter, this lens will still cast a shadow with flash on the M10 up to 30mm
- The stated aperture range is 3.5-6.3 but...it closes down on you FAST. By 35mm it's already f5. You hit f6.3 before 70mm(!), which means that the 55-200 is brighter throughout the equivalent range by an average of 2/3 stop, something to keep in mind.

UPDATE: Here's a quick speed comparison between the two lenses
18-150 55-200
55mm: f5.6 f4.5
70mm f6.3 f5.0
100mm f6.3 f5.0
135mm f6.3 f5.6
150mm f6.3 f5.6

As you can see, the 55-200 is ALWAYS faster at the equivalent focal length. For those considering trading in their 55-200 for this one, note that you'll be giving up speed as well as the 50mm extra reach


- IQ: can only take indoor shots at this time, so can't truly evaluate, but from what I can see sharpness seems to hold up surprisingly well throughout most of the range (it does soften a bit near the long end). Contrast needs to be boosted in post. And I agree with Dustin about the fringing/CA - it's present and noticeable
- I'll have to put this one through a couple of real-world situations before I have a final verdict, but first impressions are generally positive.

ETA: Also, the 18-150 may be easier to handle with an M3 or M5, both of which have grips - the M10 does not have a grip, and even after just a few minutes, one-handed shooting with this lens became somewhat uncomfortable - not a deal-breaker, but something I never really had to consider with the other lenses.
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
Here's one from my recent trip that I thought came out surprisingly artful from the lens. I've done a little post to enhance color (and some light on the main subject), but most of the look is from the lens.

Cholla Bones by Dustin Abbott, on Flickr

Bad news - you have to be REALLY careful with the sun on this lens. It is definitely prone to some ghosting.
 

AvTvM

EOS 5D MK IV
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
dpreview has posted sample shot gallery for EF-M 18-150
https://www.dpreview.com/samples/9488673812/canon-ef-m-18-150-f3-5-6-3-is-stm-gallery-posted
 

bf

EOS RP
Jul 30, 2014
249
13
I currently take 11-22 and 55-200 for my hikings. I rarely use my 18-55. Looking at DPR gallery I can't see much of this new lens. I wish they had used a more photographic eye!
It is a good walk around range. Is it as sharp as 11-22 or at least sharper than 55-200?
I look for your head to head review Dustin.
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
bf said:
I currently take 11-22 and 55-200 for my hikings. I rarely use my 18-55. Looking at DPR gallery I can't see much of this new lens. I wish they had used a more photographic eye!
It is a good walk around range. Is it as sharp as 11-22 or at least sharper than 55-200?
I look for your head to head review Dustin.
My review is live. Read it: http://bit.ly/EFM18_150STM Watch it: http://bit.ly/18_150STM

It's actually a pretty good lens.
 

Fleetie

Watching for pigs on the wing
Nov 22, 2010
375
5
49
Manchester, UK
www.facebook.com
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
bf said:
I currently take 11-22 and 55-200 for my hikings. I rarely use my 18-55. Looking at DPR gallery I can't see much of this new lens. I wish they had used a more photographic eye!
It is a good walk around range. Is it as sharp as 11-22 or at least sharper than 55-200?
I look for your head to head review Dustin.
My review is live. Read it: http://bit.ly/EFM18_150STM Watch it: http://bit.ly/18_150STM

It's actually a pretty good lens.
Thanks for your review of this lens. I read it the other day.
I am looking forward to buying it.
I'll probably get it with the M5; I currently have the M3 and the 18-55.
I was complaining on a trip out at Christmas, that the 18-55 doesn't have enough reach sometimes.
The 18-150 should totally banish that woe.


Thanks again!
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
Fleetie said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
bf said:
I currently take 11-22 and 55-200 for my hikings. I rarely use my 18-55. Looking at DPR gallery I can't see much of this new lens. I wish they had used a more photographic eye!
It is a good walk around range. Is it as sharp as 11-22 or at least sharper than 55-200?
I look for your head to head review Dustin.
My review is live. Read it: http://bit.ly/EFM18_150STM Watch it: http://bit.ly/18_150STM

It's actually a pretty good lens.
Thanks for your review of this lens. I read it the other day.
I am looking forward to buying it.
I'll probably get it with the M5; I currently have the M3 and the 18-55.
I was complaining on a trip out at Christmas, that the 18-55 doesn't have enough reach sometimes.
The 18-150 should totally banish that woe.


Thanks again!
You bet. If I personally go for an M5, it will be for the kit with the 18-150mm
 

bf

EOS RP
Jul 30, 2014
249
13
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
bf said:
I currently take 11-22 and 55-200 for my hikings. I rarely use my 18-55. Looking at DPR gallery I can't see much of this new lens. I wish they had used a more photographic eye!
It is a good walk around range. Is it as sharp as 11-22 or at least sharper than 55-200?
I look for your head to head review Dustin.
My review is live. Read it: http://bit.ly/EFM18_150STM Watch it: http://bit.ly/18_150STM

It's actually a pretty good lens.
Thanks for the good review.

How the focus speed and accuracy is compared between 55-200 and 18-150 when they are used on M5 body?
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
bf said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
bf said:
I currently take 11-22 and 55-200 for my hikings. I rarely use my 18-55. Looking at DPR gallery I can't see much of this new lens. I wish they had used a more photographic eye!
It is a good walk around range. Is it as sharp as 11-22 or at least sharper than 55-200?
I look for your head to head review Dustin.
My review is live. Read it: http://bit.ly/EFM18_150STM Watch it: http://bit.ly/18_150STM

It's actually a pretty good lens.
Thanks for the good review.

How the focus speed and accuracy is compared between 55-200 and 18-150 when they are used on M5 body?
Focus speed is actually much better than the 55-200. Much faster, more accurate.
 

bf

EOS RP
Jul 30, 2014
249
13
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
bf said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
bf said:
I currently take 11-22 and 55-200 for my hikings. I rarely use my 18-55. Looking at DPR gallery I can't see much of this new lens. I wish they had used a more photographic eye!
It is a good walk around range. Is it as sharp as 11-22 or at least sharper than 55-200?
I look for your head to head review Dustin.
My review is live. Read it: http://bit.ly/EFM18_150STM Watch it: http://bit.ly/18_150STM

It's actually a pretty good lens.
Thanks for the good review.

How the focus speed and accuracy is compared between 55-200 and 18-150 when they are used on M5 body?
Focus speed is actually much better than the 55-200. Much faster, more accurate.
Great news! Thanks.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,072
141
UPDATE

Took it outside on a nice sunny day and shot with it for the first time in such conditions.

Throughout most of the range, I found it to be sharp in the center - interestingly enough, with a very noticeable drop-off in quality toward the edges (didn't see this before in my test indoor shots). Admit to being slightly disappointed here, especially given how solid the 11-22 and 18-55 were in this respect.

Found it to be soft at 150mm (at least at f/8 and larger). Still, the fact that I can have that level of reach in an "everyday" lens is impressive...BIG advantage over the 55-200 here in many ways, allows for greater variety of shots.

I also noticed other optical flaws on occasion, like ghosting, lack of contrast, and fringing.

Is it a good lens? Yes, it has great range and will have a particular use for me. Given that I'm now used to very high quality from top lenses, it didn't blow my socks off. But it's good enough - files will just need a bit more work in post. But then again, that was the case with the 55-200 as well (although with this lens, I feel even more so esp. at/near 150mm).
 

JPAZ

If only I knew what I was doing.....
Sep 8, 2012
936
44
Thanks for all of the above comments. I just got back from a quick trip and took the M3 (with EVF, 11-22, 18-55 and 22. I found I was looking for more reach a whole lot and have been contemplating the 18-150 and waiting for some feedback. Then, a refurb 55-200 shows up on CPW for a lot less than the 18-150. I could not resist and it is on its way. I've no doubt the 18-150 is a great idea but for me, I think I'll be happy with my M kit (until something "quicker" with reach come a long.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,072
141
It's all about compromise - the 55-200 is faster and I think slightly sharper at around 150mm - so for sole telephoto coverage, that's the way to go...but there has been more than one occasion where I wished for something wider. The 18-150 does hold up well toward the wide end, which makes it a good choice as an "all-in-one" solution. But yes, it is pricey.
 

bholliman

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 6, 2012
1,473
0
USA
www.flickr.com
With my full frame kit, I've gone the route of having top quality zooms (16-35 f/4, 24-70 f/2.8 II, 70-200 f/2.8 II) to cover 16-200mm. (The new 16-35 f/2.8 III might be a better all around lens than my f/4 IS, but for my use (landscape) the f/4 is perfect - I don't need the more expensive f/2.8 lens)

With my EF-M kit the choices are not so clear. There is no clear "best" zoom other than the 11-22 in its focal range.

The 15-45, 18-55, 18-150 and 55-200 all have their advantages and disadvantages.

  • 15-45 - small size (130g), wide minimum focal length, build quality average, locks in retracted position (-)
  • 18-55 - medium size (210g) for EF-M, better build quality
  • 18-150 - large size (301g), excellent focal range, better build quality, quick/accurate AF (per Dustin Abbott)
  • 55-200 - med-large size (260g), good focal range and max range, faster max aperture through most of range, better build quality

Optically, I'm not sure there is a clear winner and loser here. I've heard the 15-45 is soft compared with the other EF-M zooms, but my experience shows mine to be as sharp as the 18-55 I owned previously. Certainly not up the the standards of my much more expensive L glass, but decently sharp.

I currently have the 15-45 and 55-200 zooms and 22/2 prime, which gives me everything buy UWA coverage, and I plan to pick up a 11-22 at some point.

While the all-in-one focal range of the 18-150 is tempting, I hate to give up 15mm on the wide end and 200 on the long end with my current 2 zoom kit. I can fit my M5 and either 22/2 or 15-45 into a reasonably small Lowepro Adventura belt pack. Using a single zoom really doesn't save that much space over a 2 lens kit.

Other than buying a 11-22 at some point, I don't plan to make any other EF-M lens changes until new options are available.
 

AvTvM

EOS 5D MK IV
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
similar here.
In addition to my 5D3 + L zoom kit i got EOS m 1st gen + 11-22, 18-55, 55-200 and 22/2. Perfect. Fits into a small bag. When mountaineering i take camera + 22 or 18-55 in a small Lowepro Dashpoint 30 bag on my backpack front strap. Immediate access.

15-45 is optically subpar. 18-150 is tempting, but for the time being I'll stick with my setup. My copy of 18-55 is rather decent. :)
 

bholliman

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 6, 2012
1,473
0
USA
www.flickr.com
AvTvM said:
similar here.
In addition to my 5D3 + L zoom kit i got EOS m 1st gen + 11-22, 18-55, 55-200 and 22/2. Perfect. Fits into a small bag. When mountaineering i take camera + 22 or 18-55 in a small Lowepro Dashpoint 30 bag on my backpack front strap. Immediate access.

15-45 is optically subpar. 18-150 is tempting, but for the time being I'll stick with my setup. My copy of 18-55 is rather decent. :)
Once I pick-up a 11-22 (I'm waiting for them to show up in the refurb sales), I may decide to part with my 15-45. I think I can live with a "gap" between 22 and 55mm since I normally like to shoot wide and long anyway. The 15-45 is a decent lens, but I find I don't use it that much. Its strongest attribute is its size, which works against it a little due to the retracted "parked" position which forces you to go through an additional step to get the camera ready to shoot. Dustin Abbott points out these drawbacks in his review.

I'd love to see Canon come out with a small 35mm or 85mm fast prime for the system, but they seem to be targeting their EF-M lenses toward the consumer market. I need to become more familiar with manual focus with the M5 (works very well in my limited experience) before I would consider one of the 3rd party MF only lenses.