So I lost my battle to not purchase the Canon EOS M100 kit with the 15-45 and 22mm after all. (although it's on a 3-6 week delivery time so I may yet reconsider).

Wish cashback this nets me a nice 24-72 zoom and a 35 f2 equivalent for £400. Seems pretty good considering my my counts it would have cost me over £1k for Pentax's closest equivalent lenses. I'll even be able to get the well regarded 11-22 in the near future.

Makes me wonder why there's such a dearth of affordable wide angle zooms and primes with Pentax?

[UncleVanya]

So I lost my battle to not purchase the Canon EOS M100 kit with the 15-45 and 22mm after all. (although it's on a 3-6 week delivery time so I may yet reconsider).

Wish cashback this nets me a nice 24-72 zoom and a 35 f2 equivalent for £400. Seems pretty good considering my my counts it would have cost me over £1k for Pentax's closest equivalent lenses. I'll even be able to get the well regarded 11-22 in the near future.

Makes me wonder why there's such a dearth of affordable wide angle zooms and primes with Pentax?

I guess I have to ask what lenses you think are equivalent. The older Pentax 16-45 was that wide and long and a constant f/4 but isn't generally available today new - the 17-70 was longer and also constant aperture and nearly as wide (it was a pretty wide 17 if I recall). The 16-50 is a totally different league and the 16-85 as well. Not much point comparing those. The 18-55 is not as wide but is longer and the crop factor of the Canon (1.6) vs. Pentax (1.5x) is also something to consider. the DA 15 on a Pentax is much wider than the 15-45 on that camera.

In any case, it looks like a good camera but don't expect anything more than basic lens performance from the 15-45 from what I read. It isn't awful but not fantastic either: Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 STM IS - Review / Test

[surfar]

It isn't awful but not fantastic either:

Ive used it on a friends M3,its a basic kit lens.

[dstar]

I look as back up Canon M50 with Canon adapter /actually very good deal in BH photo/ and add Sigma Art or C lens with canon mount. I try M 50 image very good very light body weight.Easy use after my surgery .For now i can use only one hand after surgery for several week.

I guess I have to ask what lenses you think are equivalent. The older Pentax 16-45 was that wide and long and a constant f/4 but isn't generally available today new - the 17-70 was longer and also constant aperture and nearly as wide (it was a pretty wide 17 if I recall). The 16-50 is a totally different league and the 16-85 as well. Not much point comparing those. The 18-55 is not as wide but is longer and the crop factor of the Canon (1.6) vs. Pentax (1.5x) is also something to consider. the DA 15 on a Pentax is much wider than the 15-45 on that camera.

In any case, it looks like a good camera but don't expect anything more than basic lens performance from the 15-45 from what I read. It isn't awful but not fantastic either: Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 STM IS - Review / Test

I had forgotten about the 16-45. But even that second hand plus the cheapest FA24 f2 I can find equal the same price as this little combo. The way I see it is I get the bonus of a second, higher resolution camera free.

I'd love the 16-85 but it's hugely expensive. As is something like the 12-24 (and I'm guessing the new APS-C wide zoom will be).

I'm still a bit undecided, but felt I'd better buy while I still had a prime free trial.

I don't mind second hand for older lenses but I don't have the money to throw 280 quid at a second hand lens only to find it packs up a year down the line. I'm not expecting to use the 15-45 all that often, the 22 is far more attractive.

[reh321]

So I lost my battle to not purchase the Canon EOS M100 kit with the 15-45 and 22mm after all. (although it's on a 3-6 week delivery time so I may yet reconsider).

Wish cashback this nets me a nice 24-72 zoom and a 35 f2 equivalent for £400. Seems pretty good considering my my counts it would have cost me over £1k for Pentax's closest equivalent lenses. I'll even be able to get the well regarded 11-22 in the near future.

Makes me wonder why there's such a dearth of affordable wide angle zooms and primes with Pentax?

My understanding is that constructing wide angle lenses is easier for a mount, like the EF-M, with a short flange distance. When I had a Canon Rebel, with flange distance similar to K-mount, the most cost-effective UWA lens I could find was a {used} Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6; when I switched to Pentax, the most cost-effective UWA lens I could find was a {used} Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6. There may be less difference than you perceive.

It's a funny thing really, I don't really want to buy 3rd party lenses, my rational mind says they're fine, but I can't shake the gut feeling I won't be 100% happy when I get it. So far buying only Pentax lenses I haven't been at all disappointed (even the 18-55 WR is a nice lens IMHO - wipes the floor with the Nikon 18-55 VRII I used to use), even though rationally I know that the Canon lenses may not be as good or consistent, my experiences make me want to stick with first party. Hence I didn't mention Tamron et al in the Op.

No movement from the big A yet so I've still time to change my mind. Part of me likes the idea of two separate systems with their own strengths, certainly seems better value for money at the moment (again, only considering 1st party lenses). But then another system is less time with the K-50, decisions...

Update: amazon changed the estimated delivery date to be outside of the cashback period, order cancelled.

It's a sign! I will stay faithful 😂