Great review and thanks. This lens is a no brainer in terms of versatility and image quality. it may be the only lens I will ever need for this M6 body. No adapters!! I find that I don't like them. It costs more than the 55mm because this lens because it is better and it also suits the size of the camera to a T. No huge difference between the 55mm difference at all. I went for a hike with the M6 yesterday and held it my hand the entire time!! Something I couldn't do with my Canon 7D.
Dear Dustin, I already have the kit lens 15-45mm, and additional prime lenses of 22mm pancake and the plastic fantastic 50 mm f/1,8. Which zoom lens one I should have for? The 18-150mm, 55-200mm or tamron 18-200. Btw my gear is M3. Thanks....
you have left me no option but to subscribe.. i have looked up 3 or 4 videos in succession now to realize they have all been done by you and excellently at that! thanks for some great tech reviews
Hi Dustin. I’m torn between buying this Canon 18-150mm lens and the 55-200mm lens. If it was you, what would you have chosen? and why Great review & thanks!!
I'm a bit confused about those tests you did on the 55-200. Every review I see is claiming that it's a sharp lens, but your tests show the oposite.. any idea of what's actually going on? I'm trying to decide on which one to go for between the two 🤔
I know what you're saying. It's been a long time since I've done those reviews, so I have no new information. It could be that my copy of the 55-200 was underperforming.
An excellent review. How does this compare with the Tamron 18-200mm di iii ? From the build perspective, i like the Tamron more. How do they compare optically? Size and weight is not an issue for me. Kind Regards,
I have a canon m3 and i'm planning to buy a new lens. Which one do you think worth to buy? Canon ef m 18-150mm or ef m 55-200mm? (Since the ef m 18-150 is more expensive)
Hi Dustin, I just bought the lens. You were right it's a very nice lens and sharp for a superzoom. Other reviewers were not fair to the lens. Thanks for the excellent work you do!
@@DustinAbbottTWI Probably they had the conclusions before using it and with confirmation bias they "proved" their suspicions. I am glad I saw this review and found your channel. Thanks!
Hi. Would you recommend the 18-150 over the Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di III VC? I have a Canon M50 and I want to buy an all purpose lens. I already have a speedbooster which also opens another option. I'm thinking of getting an EF 24-105mm f4L 1st gen and combine it with the speedbooster. Or, I could also get an adapter and get the EF-S 18-135 (?). Or should I just get an adapter and get the Tamron 18-200mm Di II (because it is much cheaper)? What would be your suggestion? My main concern is I'll be using it indoors (slightly low light events) and also the price. My budget is roughly for this EF-M 18-150mm.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you so much for the reply. I did a little more research and the EF-M is in fact the better choice. The Canon M50 has 99 AF points but combined with the EF-M 18-150, those points become 143 or so. This is from the Canon ad.
Dustin, I am deciding between Canon ef-m 55-200mm vs 18-150mm, I understand you reviewed both the lenses, and which lens do you recommend between these two, can afford only one at the moment, and I want to get the best one among these two, big thanks!
Hi Dustin. Thanks for your wonderful review. Just a quick question, which one would be better, shall a buy this lens the ef-m 18-150mm or the adaptor with ef-s 15-85? Thanks
Im thinking of getting the m5 but using an adaptor and getting a 24mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8 and possibly the 10-18mm. Do you think in terms of performance these lenses would do better than the kit lenses on the m5, Ive read that the kit lenses aren't usually as good as some other lenses you can buy. I guess specifically does the 24 mm and 50 mm on any of these kit lenses out perform the sharpness and image quality of those primes I mentioned? And would you say the 10-18mm although being different mm, would you say they would be sharper than the kit lenses? thanks a lot
If you are going to primarily use the M5, do yourself a favor and get the 22mm f/2 instead of the 24mm. You get an extra stop of light, and an extremely compact lens. The 11-22mm is actually a better lens than the 10-18mm. The 50mm is a nice add.
Thanks a lot! I did more research and realized that too, for some reason m lenses have been getting a bad rep but they are pretty good actually, I just noticed you answered.
Canon is bringing out a EF-M 18-200mm I hope it's not as good as my 18-150. Sometimes I leave the EF-M 32 1.4 at home as the 18-150 is just easy good enough at everything.
Some photos were just 'leaked' (via photorumors) of pictures of the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC G2...they are saying it might be released within the next couple of months. That would be an awesome update to an already pretty great lens!
+James Larsen I've been expecting that this year, though I'm surprised they tackled it first instead of the 24-70. I'll look forward to getting my grubby hands on it :)
Ηi Dustin i am going to buy an M50 and want to choose between 18-150 and kit of 15-45. + 55-200. Size matters, i want to carry with me. I am not interested in videos, i do all around and maonly street and travel photo plus some portraits. Another option is buying botjh 18-150 for travelling and 15-45 for everyday use. Pricrs where i am are 850 for the15-45. + 55-20 and 780 for the 18-150. The 15-45 i found it for 70eur. I just eonder id the 55-200 will remain almost unused. Whats your recommendation?
I just bought a 55-200 used on Ebay because I wanted a bit more reach over my 18-150. I've watched this video about three times throughout the last year trying to make a decision on a lens. I'm quite surprised at how little advantage the extra 50mm makes. I haven't compared photos back to back yet to see how they compare to each other to see if your results for the 55-200 are accurate or your copy was bad. We will see. However, I was hoping the 55-200 would have a bigger advantage due to the 50 mm of extra focal length, lighter body and the faster aperture at lower focal lengths but in reality I think the 18-150 is just a better lens. The larger aperture at shorter focal lengths doesn't impact me much because I rarely shoot it at anything less than 100mm with my zooms and the extra 50 mm of reach doesn't make a ton of difference. I'm glad I have both but when I leave the house the 18-150 goes with me. The 55-200 cost me half as much as the 18-150 so it was an easy second purchase.
Is this object the best for the Canon EOS M50? Do you know better alternatives? I do not care about weight. He does not have stability? The M50 has no stabilization.
i was at Best Buy two evenings ago. light inside like any Best Buy in the evening. I was just playing with tbe cameras on display. It was a Nikon D7200 , a Canon 80D, Canon T6, a Sony A7II. All of them had the kit lenses on them. Nikon and Sony were focusing instantly at the end of the zoom, Canon, with the 18-135 took like two full srconds, with a very noisy focus, very clumsy. I was appalled. It was just me doing something wrong or are this late Canon non fast lenses focusing like this. To be noticed that until now i used on my 5Ds only fast zooms, L lenses or third party f2.8 lenses and the Sigma 50 Art. So i didn't know about this not so fast lenses. Is this lens in the same category? I am seriously investigating to buy a body as my b cam
The 18-135mm Nano USM lens is the best focusing lens in the category, but I'm not a big fan of the STM version of the lens or the older version. This particular lens is actually very fast to focus and utterly silent. I found nothing to complain about in terms of focus.
Wh is the relationship between focal length and minimum f stop? The fuji 18-135 gets rave reviews and is faster. Also wondering what's the best fast 50mm equivalent prime with the EOS m5?
There's no specific relationship, though longer focal lengths are typically smaller apertures (though Canon has, say, a 400mm f/2.8; it's just huge and expensive). The Fuji is probably just a better lens. The best 50mm equivalent that is fast (aperture wise), is probably the Rokinon/Samyang 35mm f/1.4, though it is manual focus only.
You're right - I ended up overlooking the 18-55 in my final comments. I don't think you are giving up anything optically using the 18-150. It's a bit bigger lens, obviously, but having that extra new 100mm is HUGE. I'd make that upgrade without hesitation.
I haven't researched the Canon EOS M line. But it seems to me that constant aperture lenses for the camera seem to be rare. If this is true, why? Is it because this is a budget minded system and constant aperture lenses would not sell well?
I honestly don't know what Canon is thinking in that regard. They have one prime lens with an aperture under f/2.8. The only other prime is a 28mm macro lens, but it only has a maximum aperture of f/3.5. There are some really fantastic manual focus alternatives from Samyang/Rokinon, but Canon has really disappointed in decent AF primes.
The EOS M line of lenses seems focused on being small and light. If you don't mind the bulk and want more glass, Canon pushes you to use EF-S lenses (or even EF lenses) adapted, that still performs as native. There is little overlap. The other alternative is get good light and shot constant aperture F6.3+...
Great and informative video. I am curious if you have had the opportunity to find out if your 55-200mm was indeed de-centered. I have both lenses and was surprised to see the difference in edge performance in your comparison. Keep up the videos.
Two months after i bought sony A7 i step up on a super deal on this camera + 18-150mm lens i really regreat not buying it quit dissapointed with the A7 video performance even with a F1.8 lens it sucks! Let me know how a fullframe camera with one F1.8 lens, sucks on recording indoor video? This canon with this lens would do better i had one canon eos M and i like it very much i feel that with a smartphone i would have a better video than with sony A7!!!
@@DustinAbbottTWI i like canon mirrorless and this 18-150mm lens would fit all my needs on APS-C with 5 axis stabilization. Good autofocus and i had one golden oportunity for caching one new half the price. 😤
the part on lightroom is much more better in terms of audio quality, whereas in the other where you talk directly to us there's a drastically drop in audio quality; in this part i hear a lot more ambient noise like it was recorded with the internal mic of your camera.
TheSelfCameraman That's strange, as it certainly isn't the case. I did use two different mics, however. The Lightroom section is a Rode, the other is Be Audio.
Probably no loss. It seems like quite a number of third party lenses have trouble with the M5 firmware. You reported that Tamron 18-200mm, Christopher Frost reported the Yongnuo 85mm F 1.8 would not stop down past F 2.8 with the adapter. Sigma would probably need to design an M mount specific 18-35mm F 1.8, and not use the standard one with the adapter.
Maxim Muir Not to mention that it is not a great balance on a mirrorless body like the M. A little too big and heavy. I went through my kit of third party lenses and found that all the Tamrons I have focus fine (24-70, 70-200, 45, 85). The 70-200 + 85mm are actually very fast.
This is a SERIOUSLY flawed review, comparing a new lens against an obviously damaged lens! I am actually surprised that you would post something that challenges your credibility and qualifications as a reviewer.
Great review and thanks. This lens is a no brainer in terms of versatility and image quality. it may be the only lens I will ever need for this M6 body. No adapters!! I find that I don't like them. It costs more than the 55mm because this lens because it is better and it also suits the size of the camera to a T. No huge difference between the 55mm difference at all. I went for a hike with the M6 yesterday and held it my hand the entire time!! Something I couldn't do with my Canon 7D.
Valid points.
Your lens reviews are so good.
Thank you!
Due to your review on the 18-150 STM, I bought one for my Canon M50 and just love it. Thanks.
Great to hear!
should I get this lens or Tamron 18-200 lens that has the same f/3,5-6,3 aperture?
I like this lens better if you shoot EOS M. It's more compact and will give you Canon's Lens Aberration Correction.
Dear Dustin, I already have the kit lens 15-45mm, and additional prime lenses of 22mm pancake and the plastic fantastic 50 mm f/1,8. Which zoom lens one I should have for? The 18-150mm, 55-200mm or tamron 18-200. Btw my gear is M3. Thanks....
+Alif Firdauzi I like the 18-150mm quite a bit
Your reviews are incredible Dustin as always.
Thank you very much
you have left me no option but to subscribe.. i have looked up 3 or 4 videos in succession now to realize they have all been done by you and excellently at that! thanks for some great tech reviews
LOL- sorry to force it on you!
Hi Dustin. I’m torn between buying this Canon 18-150mm lens and the 55-200mm lens. If it was you, what would you have chosen? and why
Great review & thanks!!
I went with the 18-150mm. It's just so versatile.
I have a M50 Mark. 2. I use the Canon 18 to 135 with an adapter and I get great results
I'm a bit confused about those tests you did on the 55-200. Every review I see is claiming that it's a sharp lens, but your tests show the oposite.. any idea of what's actually going on? I'm trying to decide on which one to go for between the two 🤔
I know what you're saying. It's been a long time since I've done those reviews, so I have no new information. It could be that my copy of the 55-200 was underperforming.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks.
An excellent review.
How does this compare with the Tamron 18-200mm di iii ?
From the build perspective, i like the Tamron more. How do they compare optically?
Size and weight is not an issue for me.
Kind Regards,
I wouldn’t say there is a major difference between them.
Dustin Abbott Thanks for the reply
A good reviewer, a great photographer. That's the way all reviewers should be! Thanks for sharing.
That's kind!
I have a canon m3 and i'm planning to buy a new lens.
Which one do you think worth to buy?
Canon ef m 18-150mm or ef m 55-200mm? (Since the ef m 18-150 is more expensive)
I would personally go for the 18-150mm. Amazing versatility, and quite decent image quality.
thanks for the advice
Hi Dustin,
I just bought the lens. You were right it's a very nice lens and sharp for a superzoom.
Other reviewers were not fair to the lens.
Thanks for the excellent work you do!
I was surprised by other reviewers, as their findings did not match my own.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Probably they had the conclusions before using it and with confirmation bias they "proved" their suspicions. I am glad I saw this review and found your channel. Thanks!
Hi. Would you recommend the 18-150 over the Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di III VC? I have a Canon M50 and I want to buy an all purpose lens. I already have a speedbooster which also opens another option. I'm thinking of getting an EF 24-105mm f4L 1st gen and combine it with the speedbooster. Or, I could also get an adapter and get the EF-S 18-135 (?). Or should I just get an adapter and get the Tamron 18-200mm Di II (because it is much cheaper)? What would be your suggestion? My main concern is I'll be using it indoors (slightly low light events) and also the price. My budget is roughly for this EF-M 18-150mm.
I would personally go with the 18-150mm. It's designed natively for the system and produces nice images.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you so much for the reply. I did a little more research and the EF-M is in fact the better choice. The Canon M50 has 99 AF points but combined with the EF-M 18-150, those points become 143 or so. This is from the Canon ad.
Dustin, I am deciding between Canon ef-m 55-200mm vs 18-150mm, I understand you reviewed both the lenses, and which lens do you recommend between these two, can afford only one at the moment, and I want to get the best one among these two, big thanks!
I personally would go with the 18-150mm. It's extremely useful, and I didn't see enough of an image quality improvement to go with the 55-200 instead.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks Dustin, much appreciated!
Hi Dustin. Thanks for your wonderful review. Just a quick question, which one would be better, shall a buy this lens the ef-m 18-150mm or the adaptor with ef-s 15-85? Thanks
I would go for this lens. It's a good performer and a much nicer fit for the camera.
Wanderfull review thanks
Awesome reviews as always . Thank you
You're welcome!
The review is quite good. I have a canon M10. I think EF-M 22 f2, EF 50 f1.8 and EF 55-250 with adapter work quite good for me.
Thank you
Im thinking of getting the m5 but using an adaptor and getting a 24mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8 and possibly the 10-18mm. Do you think in terms of performance these lenses would do better than the kit lenses on the m5, Ive read that the kit lenses aren't usually as good as some other lenses you can buy. I guess specifically does the 24 mm and 50 mm on any of these kit lenses out perform the sharpness and image quality of those primes I mentioned? And would you say the 10-18mm although being different mm, would you say they would be sharper than the kit lenses? thanks a lot
If you are going to primarily use the M5, do yourself a favor and get the 22mm f/2 instead of the 24mm. You get an extra stop of light, and an extremely compact lens. The 11-22mm is actually a better lens than the 10-18mm. The 50mm is a nice add.
Thanks a lot! I did more research and realized that too, for some reason m lenses have been getting a bad rep but they are pretty good actually, I just noticed you answered.
Hi Dustin,
Nice review. Do you have any comparison of EF-M 18-150 vs Tamron 18-200 or 18-400?
I use a Canon M6 Mark ii
I don't. I haven't really done much EF-M reviews over the past three years, as I personally haven't owned an M body since the M3.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for letting me know
Can you do a review on a Canon 10-18 4.5 to 5.6 IS STM Lens.
I'm not Abbott - but I'm doing one soon :)
James Larsen km
thx, this is the review I am looking for !
Yes, there hasn't really been many reviews of the lens yet, in part because it only comes in kit right now.
Canon is bringing out a EF-M 18-200mm I hope it's not as good as my 18-150. Sometimes I leave the EF-M 32 1.4 at home as the 18-150 is just easy good enough at everything.
I don't know - I think I'd rather have great options.
Some photos were just 'leaked' (via photorumors) of pictures of the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC G2...they are saying it might be released within the next couple of months.
That would be an awesome update to an already pretty great lens!
+James Larsen I've been expecting that this year, though I'm surprised they tackled it first instead of the 24-70. I'll look forward to getting my grubby hands on it :)
Can't wait until you get your hands on one! :)
Your review will probably be the deciding factor for getting one or not for me.
What is your opinion of this lens vs the Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 (adapted)?
I definitely prefer this lens. I think is definitely optically superior and is a much nicer match physically.
And since the USM version of the 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 has unchanged optics, the same comment applies?
Ηi Dustin i am going to buy an M50 and want to choose between 18-150 and kit of 15-45. + 55-200. Size matters, i want to carry with me. I am not interested in videos, i do all around and maonly street and travel photo plus some portraits. Another option is buying botjh 18-150 for travelling and 15-45 for everyday use. Pricrs where i am are 850 for the15-45. + 55-20 and 780 for the 18-150. The 15-45 i found it for 70eur. I just eonder id the 55-200 will remain almost unused. Whats your recommendation?
I personally would go with the 18-150. It will get used more often.
Very detailed and honest review. I've been chewing on whether to buy this lens for my M50 and your video really helps.
Glad it was helpful!
Can ND filters be placed in the lens to reduce flare issue??
ND filter don't reduce flare. A bad filter can increase it, but adding an ND filter won't change/improve the optics of the lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI ok got it...tnx
I just bought a 55-200 used on Ebay because I wanted a bit more reach over my 18-150. I've watched this video about three times throughout the last year trying to make a decision on a lens. I'm quite surprised at how little advantage the extra 50mm makes. I haven't compared photos back to back yet to see how they compare to each other to see if your results for the 55-200 are accurate or your copy was bad. We will see.
However, I was hoping the 55-200 would have a bigger advantage due to the 50 mm of extra focal length, lighter body and the faster aperture at lower focal lengths but in reality I think the 18-150 is just a better lens. The larger aperture at shorter focal lengths doesn't impact me much because I rarely shoot it at anything less than 100mm with my zooms and the extra 50 mm of reach doesn't make a ton of difference. I'm glad I have both but when I leave the house the 18-150 goes with me. The 55-200 cost me half as much as the 18-150 so it was an easy second purchase.
Grant, I think the line that stands out to me (and is probably accurate) is that the 18-150 is just a better lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI And perhaps the used market backs this up. A used 18-150mm will cost more than a new 55-200mm.
Thanks, very helpful as always.
Glad to hear it!
Is it fits ok to canon eos m10? thanks
Yes it does.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for replay ;)
Is this object the best for the Canon EOS M50? Do you know better alternatives? I do not care about weight. He does not have stability? The M50 has no stabilization.
I do think this is currently the best multipurpose lens for your M50.
i was at Best Buy two evenings ago. light inside like any Best Buy in the evening. I was just playing with tbe cameras on display. It was a Nikon D7200 , a Canon 80D, Canon T6, a Sony A7II. All of them had the kit lenses on them. Nikon and Sony were focusing instantly at the end of the zoom, Canon, with the 18-135 took like two full srconds, with a very noisy focus, very clumsy. I was appalled. It was just me doing something wrong or are this late Canon non fast lenses focusing like this. To be noticed that until now i used on my 5Ds only fast zooms, L lenses or third party f2.8 lenses and the Sigma 50 Art. So i didn't know about this not so fast lenses. Is this lens in the same category? I am seriously investigating to buy a body as my b cam
The 18-135mm Nano USM lens is the best focusing lens in the category, but I'm not a big fan of the STM version of the lens or the older version. This particular lens is actually very fast to focus and utterly silent. I found nothing to complain about in terms of focus.
Wh is the relationship between focal length and minimum f stop? The fuji 18-135 gets rave reviews and is faster. Also wondering what's the best fast 50mm equivalent prime with the EOS m5?
There's no specific relationship, though longer focal lengths are typically smaller apertures (though Canon has, say, a 400mm f/2.8; it's just huge and expensive). The Fuji is probably just a better lens. The best 50mm equivalent that is fast (aperture wise), is probably the Rokinon/Samyang 35mm f/1.4, though it is manual focus only.
Good review.
I did not hear you speak about the how this lens stack up against the EF-M18-55. Is this lens worth the upgrade?
You're right - I ended up overlooking the 18-55 in my final comments. I don't think you are giving up anything optically using the 18-150. It's a bit bigger lens, obviously, but having that extra new 100mm is HUGE. I'd make that upgrade without hesitation.
I haven't researched the Canon EOS M line. But it seems to me that constant aperture lenses for the camera seem to be rare. If this is true, why? Is it because this is a budget minded system and constant aperture lenses would not sell well?
I honestly don't know what Canon is thinking in that regard. They have one prime lens with an aperture under f/2.8. The only other prime is a 28mm macro lens, but it only has a maximum aperture of f/3.5. There are some really fantastic manual focus alternatives from Samyang/Rokinon, but Canon has really disappointed in decent AF primes.
And I still want my 27mm F 2.8 STM pancake lens for Canon EOS 1.6 crop...I know....shutup already:)
The EOS M line of lenses seems focused on being small and light. If you don't mind the bulk and want more glass, Canon pushes you to use EF-S lenses (or even EF lenses) adapted, that still performs as native. There is little overlap. The other alternative is get good light and shot constant aperture F6.3+...
Great and informative video. I am curious if you have had the opportunity to find out if your 55-200mm was indeed de-centered. I have both lenses and was surprised to see the difference in edge performance in your comparison. Keep up the videos.
Unfortunately I can’t really comment, as I don’t have the lens anymore. I moved to a Sony a6500 body because I need the 4K video.
Thank you for the reply.
Great and fair review! Thanks! ;)
Thank you!
Thank you.
You're welcome.
that the default dance?
nice T-shirt Dustin bro😉
Two months after i bought sony A7 i step up on a super deal on this camera + 18-150mm lens i really regreat not buying it quit dissapointed with the A7 video performance even with a F1.8 lens it sucks! Let me know how a fullframe camera with one F1.8 lens, sucks on recording indoor video? This canon with this lens would do better i had one canon eos M and i like it very much i feel that with a smartphone i would have a better video than with sony A7!!!
The original a7 is older tech now. Newer a7III/a7rIII bodies are amazing for video
@@DustinAbbottTWI i like canon mirrorless and this 18-150mm lens would fit all my needs on APS-C with 5 axis stabilization. Good autofocus and i had one golden oportunity for caching one new half the price. 😤
sold
Enjoy your lens
canon ef m 18-150 or tamron ef m 18-200 for my canon eos m3
+Keats Brusas I like the 18-150's size a lot.
what happened to the audio? very good review anyway.
??? Not quite sure what you are referring to. It's my same, normal workflow and sounds just like my other videos.
the part on lightroom is much more better in terms of audio quality, whereas in the other where you talk directly to us there's a drastically drop in audio quality; in this part i hear a lot more ambient noise like it was recorded with the internal mic of your camera.
TheSelfCameraman is right.. lot of audio Noise in the background
TheSelfCameraman That's strange, as it certainly isn't the case. I did use two different mics, however. The Lightroom section is a Rode, the other is Be Audio.
i think be audio is b audio
my 55-200 is very sharp. Especially at 55mm.
Hi Marc, I'm glad you're happy with your lens!
I think you had a bad copy of the 55-200. Mine is way sharper then the 18-150.
That's always possible.
if you'd love to buy a lens made in Malaysia for $499, plz get hurry to purchase this lens today.
A little tongue-in-cheek here?
Very informative review. I think you’ve made me feel a little better about spending $500 haha thanks!
I’m glad it help out!
M eleven - missed that one?
So did Canon! That was a mistake on my part; I meant M10.
ha ha, thanks for the replie - always love your videos probably the best on youtube by far for reviews
Thanks!
Put a sigma 18-35 1.8 pls.
What are you referring to? I'm not sure what you are requesting.
I think that he would like you to test sigma 18-35 on M5
If that is the case, it probably isn't going to happen. I don't have the Sigma on hand.
Probably no loss. It seems like quite a number of third party lenses have trouble with the M5 firmware. You reported that Tamron 18-200mm, Christopher Frost reported the Yongnuo 85mm F 1.8 would not stop down past F 2.8 with the adapter. Sigma would probably need to design an M mount specific 18-35mm F 1.8, and not use the standard one with the adapter.
Maxim Muir Not to mention that it is not a great balance on a mirrorless body like the M. A little too big and heavy. I went through my kit of third party lenses and found that all the Tamrons I have focus fine (24-70, 70-200, 45, 85). The 70-200 + 85mm are actually very fast.
M11?
Oops :) That should be M10. You can tell which one I HAVEN'T reviewed!
Is that a CR1 or a CR0? Hehe
Chosenbydestiny Probably a CR0, I'm afraid. Maybe I just outed Canon's FF MIL, though :)
This is a SERIOUSLY flawed review, comparing a new lens against an obviously damaged lens! I am actually surprised that you would post something that challenges your credibility and qualifications as a reviewer.
Obviously damaged?