Canon EF-M lens for BMPCC 6K G2?

I just got a BMPCC 6K G2, and I use it with the lenses I have for my Canon DSLR. Two of them are EF mount and fixed focal length, no stabilization, and the other is an EF-S mount with stabilization, but it's rather large and heavy, plus the focal length tends to change by itself it it's leaning down or up because it doesn't have much resistance.

I have realized that shooting film handheld with a cage that has a nice handle at the top produces very shaky video in the other two lenses, even the 28mm one. So I would like to find a decent but inexpensive lens that has good stabilization and is not too heavy. I found a Canon that I will try to describe because I posted a link to it and got a message that I'm not allowed to post URLs. It's a EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM lens.

Now, I know that the BMPCC 6K G2 takes EF-S mount because the large lens I have has that mount, but what about EF-M mount? When I do a search here I get a lot of results with just mount, so I can't find anything.

No chance with M-mount, the flange distance is much shorter. You need to stick with EF or EF-S.
Some folks around here seem to like the 18-55mm.

Yup 18-55mm f2.8 is a handy bit of glass.

The thing with the Canon 18-55mm f2.8 EF-S is that it wouldn't be that much different from the one I already have, which is about the same but 18-200mm, except that it's f5.6 (but keep in mind that the BMPCC 6K G2 doesn't have internal ND filters, so that's not a terrible thing). But that lens has a really bad zoom mechanism for which if you are pointing upwards, the zoom recedes, and if you're pointing downwards, it goes all the way in. It was that way since I got it, it was bundled with my Canon EOS 60D back in 2012.

Your talking about the 18-200mm I assume ?

Your talking about the 18-200mm I assume ?

Yes, just like I put in my post.

I think you guys mean the 17-55mm 2.8 EF-S (not 18)?

Your 18-200 f5.6 cannot nearly produce images like this lens can (well basically any 2.8 or faster lens).
Also it has the best IS for video I've ever used in a lens.

I think you guys mean the 17-55mm 2.8 EF-S (not 18)?

To clarify, I'm talking about one of the lenses I have, the Canon EF-S 18-200mm that came with my Canon EOS 60D back in 2012. It's an f/3.5-5.6. Not a bad lens (probably professionals would say it's garbage, but I've taken tens of thousands of great looking photos with it, and the video I shot so far using it on the BMPCC 6K looks great). This is it: https://www.amazon.com/Canon-18-200mm-3-5-5-6-Standard-Cameras/dp/B001ET6QFY?th=1

The one thing I hate about this lens is that the mechanism for which you zoom in and out is very loose, so as long as you're shooting horizontally, you're fine, but try to shoot downwards or upwards more than 40º while you're zoomed in, and if you're shooting up, it will recede back, and if shooting down, it will extend. Should come with some type of adjustment but I haven't seen one. Also, I hate that to zoom in you have to to rotate the thing counterclockwise, it's totally backwards, and I keep moving it clockwise to zoom in. But I think this might be a characteristic of EF Mount lenses. I know Micro 4/3 lenses have that the way it's supposed to be.

Your 18-200 f5.6 cannot nearly produce images like this lens can (well basically any 2.8 or faster lens).

You mean because of the difference in aperture? Because if this is the lens you guys are talking about, it's basically the same I have but 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens as opposed to 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6. That would give me such a drastic difference in image quality? I mean, this lens seems to be from the same product line, it looks identical to mine.

Plus keep in mind the BMPCC 6K G2 doesn't have internal ND filters, so depending on the shooting situation, you can't even use the extra aperture. The other day I was shooting in the daytime with the sun up, and I had my 50mm f/1.4 Canon lens. With the ISO at 100, and the iris all the way down to f/22, I was still getting too much light and overblowing the highlights. Meaning, I don't think I had any way to stop the light coming in unless I had an external ND filter, which I don't have but I need to buy.

Also it has the best IS for video I've ever used in a lens.

If it's like I think, the same product line as mine, and therefore the IS is the same, it's not bad, but I would prefer something better. I bought a nice cage for the camera with a handle that has a rubber grip, and I practiced walking slowly trying to keep the camera straight and trying to not transfer my body motion to it, but when I saw the footage on my TV set I was really surprised at how shaky it is. With the 18-200mm lens that is, with the other two, a 50mm and a 28mm, it was so shaky it looked like I had moved the camera like a paint shaker.

How about this one? Anyone has any experience with it?

https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6H27K/ref=pd_ci_mcx_mh_mcx_views_1?pd_rd_w=MKfWC&content-id=amzn1.sym.225b4624-972d-4629-9040-f1bf9923dd95%3Aamzn1.symc.40e6a10e-cbc4-4fa5-81e3-4435ff64d03b&pf_rd_p=225b4624-972d-4629-9040-f1bf9923dd95&pf_rd_r=QMC18J2FCB1191MTE71Y&pd_rd_wg=OS5nk&pd_rd_r=eadaa752-9a59-44e9-b698-18089b95609e&pd_rd_i=B003A6H27K&th=1

(Sorry for the ridiculously long link, I tried to make it shorter but Bitly forces you to create an account now )

No it's not the same IS. It seems like you really need to test some lenses yourself if you think there isn't a lot of difference between good lenses and kit lenses.

No it's not the same IS. It seems like you really need to test some lenses yourself if you think there isn't a lot of difference between good lenses and kit lenses.

I don't have to be a lens expert to know that there is a difference between good lenses and kit lenses. Like I cringe when people tell me that they really enjoy movies because they have a soundbar. But there's also the factor of money, how much of it do you have and can spend on lenses. There will always be a better lens. My goal is to have a decent one, even if it's not the best of the best.

So, I ordered the Sigma and got it yesterday. I got it rather late so I did some dusk shooting and it was stellar. With the ISO at 100 I even had to close the iris several stops. Then I did some indoor shooting with just a ceiling fan light (albeit a very strong one and rather warm). The footage looks amazing. Of course the BMPCC 6K G2 is part of that, but I can definitely tell the difference between this lens and the Canon 18-200mm, which is much softer.

In fact, the indoor footage looks so perfect out of the camera that I tried applying some LUTs but took them out, because other than the conversion from the camera's LOG to Rec.709, and maybe a bit of saturation, anything else was just overkill.

As for the stabilization, well, it's still shaky, but if getting better OS means spending much more, I'm happy with the Sigma.