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

bholliman

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 6, 2012
1,473
0
USA
www.flickr.com
ejenner said:
Just got mine today. Compared to 10-22 and sigma 18-250 (macro) @ 18mm f6.3 and f8.

M 18-150 is the best. More CA than the 10-22, but also better contrast and sharpness.

Seems good though the range @ f6.3. Similar to the Sigma @35mm, better again after 50-70mm.

I find that a lot of my lenses don't seem to follow what I see on TDP, either compared to other lenses or comparing f-stops. I trust forum comments here and POTN much more.

There are also decent sample images you can download that look good at 18mm and are much more in line with what I am seeing.

Actually like this lens more than I thought I would. Sure it's not fast, but very decent at f6.3, small and light for what it is.
I've very happy with my EF-M 18-150 as well. As I noted earlier in this thread, my results are very different (much better) from TDP's copy.

When I have time I plan to do some controlled side by side testing, but in the limited comparisons I've done against my EF-M 15-45 and EF-M 55-200, the 18-150 is better or just as good, both in the center and at the corners. I have my EF-M 55-200 and 15-45 up for sale since I don't feel I need all 3.
 

yakman

EOS M50
Jun 11, 2013
34
0
LiangVincentWang.com
Do any of you find the focus speed of 18-150 on M5 slow on the tele end?
I tried it in the local Canon store.
It would some time hunt in the wrong direction.
Compared that to 80D with 18-135 using PDAF. 80D is easier 3 times faster...
Single point single shot AF
Still subjects, one 1 meter away, the other 10 meters away
 

bholliman

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 6, 2012
1,473
0
USA
www.flickr.com
yakman said:
Do any of you find the focus speed of 18-150 on M5 slow on the tele end?
I tried it in the local Canon store.
It would some time hunt in the wrong direction.
Compared that to 80D with 18-135 using PDAF. 80D is easier 3 times faster...
Single point single shot AF
Still subjects, one 1 meter away, the other 10 meters away
I don't have an 80D or 18-135 to compare with, but focus is definitely slower and less accurate than my 5DsR and 300 or 70-200 - but I expect that. The M's don't have dedicated AF processors or as much battery power as a DSLR.

I find the AF to be "good enough" for general purpose use, primarily shooting our 5-6-7 year old kids. I used it last week for a kids track event and my M5 and 18-150 nailed focus on all but a few shots, albeit in good light with the kids mostly moving parallel to my focal plane, so not an extremely demanding environment.

I've been using my M5 with the 18-150 and 22/2 prime for almost all my family photography for the past few months and they have performed extremely well.
 

Quirkz

EOS RP
Oct 30, 2014
227
165
I've also found the 18-150 AF slow at the tele end; but the AF on the 22mm is very fast. Much faster than my old first edition M.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,639
2,153
bholliman said:
The M's don't have dedicated AF processors or as much battery power as a DSLR.
The M-series bodies use the same batteries as Rebel/xxxD cameras.
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
Quirkz said:
I've also found the 18-150 AF slow at the tele end; but the AF on the 22mm is very fast. Much faster than my old first edition M.
The strength of STM is smoothness, not torque. The 22mm puts little stress on an AF system due to the focal length, so yes, it focuses pretty quickly. I don't think STM has enough torque to really push telephoto AF speeds, particularly major focus shifts. I'd like to see Canon implement Nano USM for future EF-M lenses; it gives much more focus speed and seems to be fully compatible with the DPAF technology. I've been very impressed with both Nano USM lenses I've reviewed (at least as far as autofocus performance).
 

yakman

EOS M50
Jun 11, 2013
34
0
LiangVincentWang.com
After a long wait, finally got home the M5 on its own.
I tested the 18-150 again and find the tele end not working for me. It's like EOS M AF speed there.
Its advantage against 18-55 on tele side can no longer justify a purchase.

I'd still recommend it for anyone shooting stationary or travel scenery. But not for any moving objects..

Tested with my 70-200 F4 IS, despite much heavier, the USM lens AF faster than the native 18-150...
I guess, i'll just adapt a 24-105 or 70-200 if needed.
 

bholliman

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 6, 2012
1,473
0
USA
www.flickr.com
yakman said:
After a long wait, finally got home the M5 on its own.
I tested the 18-150 again and find the tele end not working for me. It's like EOS M AF speed there.
Its advantage against 18-55 on tele side can no longer justify a purchase.

I'd still recommend it for anyone shooting stationary or travel scenery. But not for any moving objects..

Tested with my 70-200 F4 IS, despite much heavier, the USM lens AF faster than the native 18-150...
I guess, i'll just adapt a 24-105 or 70-200 if needed.
If AF is really bad at the long end, you might have a bad 18-150 copy. Mine focuses pretty well at all focus lengths. I have used it a lot for shooting the kids swimming, track events, and just playing, all moving subjects mostly over 100mm and I get a very high in-focus rate. Not as good focus or IQ as my 70-200 f/2.8 II and 5DsR, but I dont expect that. The images are certainly "good enough" to document these events from my perspective.
 

yakman

EOS M50
Jun 11, 2013
34
0
LiangVincentWang.com
bholliman said:
If AF is really bad at the long end, you might have a bad 18-150 copy. Mine focuses pretty well at all focus lengths. I have used it a lot for shooting the kids swimming, track events, and just playing, all moving subjects mostly over 100mm and I get a very high in-focus rate. Not as good focus or IQ as my 70-200 f/2.8 II and 5DsR, but I dont expect that. The images are certainly "good enough" to document these events from my perspective.
I think maybe my test case was indoor and switching from near to far objects.
If the objects are all at a similar distance, doesn't require the lens to "zoom" from near to far, the tracking can be possible under good lighting.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,072
141
I've had AF hang up as well at the long end of the 18-150, but mostly when it was out of focus to begin with. In fact I've missed a few shots initially because of it.

I think overall the 18-150 does what I need it to do. The compromises are (unfortunately) very clear when you use it, but most of the time they can be worked around. Typically a higher-than-normal contrast boost, and USM tweaking for low-ISO shots yields results I find quite good (considering its size).

The 15-45 is the odd man out - if not for work I'd sell it, I have no other use for it at this point. It just does not hold up to my standards IQ-wise. But for work use I like its compact size and its single-lens wide to normal perspective that neither the 11-22 nor 18-150 provide.
 

rrcphoto

EOS 5D MK IV
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
Act444 said:
The wide end looks a bit soft - mine isn't that bad in the center - but the long end seems about right. Not its strong point.
the 18-150 is now my walkaround lens for general photos. it *IS* a lens that benefits greatly from DPP's DLO, or some other form of computational lens optimization beyond just normal CA. This lens shines if you use DLO to correct it's rather obvious flaws.

(download the JPG versus seeing it inline - as it changes the % of magnification. the views are shown at 100% magnification)

Considering this is a 8.33x lens, the results are great if there's a little care involved.
 

Attachments