# Further talk about the fate of the EOS M system



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 2, 2020)

> There has been some chatter about the future of the EOS M system once again after a report surfaced last week that the system would be shuttered as soon as 2021.
> This isn’t a new phenomenon, the death of the EOS M system has been talked about since the launch of the EOS R system back in 2018. While Canon has continued to release new EOS M camera bodies, the lens lineup is still limping along with no apparent direction or excitement.
> So is the death of the EOS M greatly exaggerated?
> Not according to two people I spoke with this week. One of them is privy to the roadmap going forward and I am told that there is nothing in regards to the EOS M in the 2021 roadmap. The source called this “unusual”, but cautioned that the current global challenges may be the reason and that a roadmap could be updated later in Q4.
> Another source claims that the system is going to go...



Continue reading...


----------



## toodamnice (Sep 2, 2020)

This is surprising considering how popular the M cameras are.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Sep 2, 2020)

It seems stupid to release another M body and then kill the line. People interested in an M body are not just going to auto-upgrade to an APS-C RF day 1 when it comes out. If they really are putting out a "Cadillac" M body later this year, then I hope there will be a couple of lenses as well, and the APS-C RF gets pushed back another year or two to late 2022 or 2023, allowing more space for the RF 5DS and 1D equivalents to hit first.


----------



## Del Paso (Sep 2, 2020)

It would be a strange decision to abandon such a popular system, especially after having introduced the M 6II...
Not convinced M users would rather buy a much bigger APS-C R model.
An EOS 7 DII (future EOS R) user isn't the usual clientele for the M system, and the EOS 90 D no replacement for the M 5 or 50.
Extreme compactness still is THE argument for the M, and, for some, it's disadvantage.
And stupid me was just saving money for the coming "uber M"


----------



## Andy Westwood (Sep 2, 2020)

I think it will be a shame if the little compact EOS M system is killed off and this will leave a gap in the market for a small enthusiast setup, unless of course Canon has something better up its sleeve to replace the EOS M with


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 2, 2020)

A replacement using a RP mount makes sense. It can still be a small camera, but it would simplify production to be able to have common components. You might even be able to use FF lenses or APS-C lenses on FF bodies. It never made sense to have two different and non adaptable lens systems.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 2, 2020)

So no new EF-M lenses expected in 2021? A body possibly expected in 2021. And the series will eventually die.

I think an awful lot is being inferred here. There weren't any new lenses this year, either. And everything will die someday. It's obvious M development is on hold while R is a priority, but I think now that the R5 and R6 establish that Canon is still a company to be reckoned with their attention can turn to other matters.


----------



## Stu_bert (Sep 2, 2020)

not on a 2021 roadmap doesn’t bother me if they refresh m bodies in 2020. Also as CanonRumors stated, that roadmap hasn’t been refreshed due to Covid. The m sells well, but I don’t think the segment needs it refreshed as often.

Not on a 2022 roadmap would be more significant.

Love to see how Canon thinks it can offer M users a migration to R - no option to take lenses, batteries and in fact anything.

Remember they may have plans but those change, and even if they do eventually decide sometime in 2022/3 to cease development well any M kit you have will continue to work well for many years to come.


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Sep 2, 2020)

There is more risk of readers being bored to death with these rumours being relaunched over and over again...


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 2, 2020)

This is where the armchair Monday morning “CEOs” who have zero insight into Canon’s internal market research tell us how stupid Canon is while making the case for how things would be much better for Canon if forum experts were running things.


----------



## zonoskar (Sep 2, 2020)

toodamnice said:


> This is surprising considering how popular the M cameras are.


If they make equally priced APS-C RF mount camera's and a small line-up of APS-C specific lenses, I don't see why the new APS-C RF line wouldn't be equally successful.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Sep 2, 2020)

I know there’s a lot of love for the m system out there and there are some really, really good bodies, but I honestly can’t see it lasting much longer. Always felt like it was a mirrorless stop gap until the real mirrorless cameras arrived.


----------



## Stu_bert (Sep 2, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A replacement using a RP mount makes sense. It can still be a small camera, but it would simplify production to be able to have common components. You might even be able to use FF lenses or APS-C lenses on FF bodies. It never made sense to have two different and non adaptable lens systems.



Even when the average M user is never likely to buy an R body costing twice as much, and lenses costing twice as much? I think M users are less interested in upgrading to the more expensive R/RF ecosystem. I discount people here as being representative of the larger M segment.

And if Canon does drop it and only gives me the option to ditch all my kit, then when I come to having to replace my Ms as they’re no longer repairable, if Canon doesn’t offer significantly better than Fuji then my M funds will go to them.


----------



## Philrp (Sep 2, 2020)

The M mount is 47mm in diameter and the RF mount is 54mm in diameter.

An APS-C RF mount cameras could be as small as the M line.

They would just need to add some smaller designed RF lenses.

Great news!


----------



## timmy_650 (Sep 2, 2020)

I don’t think canon knows what they will do. I think they have ideas but they are smart enough to sell things that consumers want. If the M is still selling well in two years, they will keep it alive. They don’t have to spend much on development


----------



## PureClassA (Sep 2, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A replacement using a RP mount makes sense. It can still be a small camera, but it would simplify production to be able to have common components. You might even be able to use FF lenses or APS-C lenses on FF bodies. It never made sense to have two different and non adaptable lens systems.


EXACTLY! The M system is popular because of the size. And if Canon can create a uniform lens mount system across ALL lines AND still make subcompact, M sized RF mount APSC bodies, there is no reason to maintain the M line. Because people who want small cameras largely dont care whether the name is M or RF so long as they are comparably small. We have not yet seen one single RF-C lens yet. But they are probably going to be very compact like the M line, even if the throat is 7mm bigger. If Canon feels they can maintain or grow their market from M to RF-C, then they will. The cost savings and profit potential would be much better.

Now the first RF-C will probably be standard sized bodies like a 7D replacement. But it wont be long before we see some subcompact RF-C bodies moving into M territory. Canon seems to have little to no interest in making M lenses, but they are cranking out glass and patents for RF like water from a broken hydrant


----------



## PureClassA (Sep 2, 2020)

Philrp said:


> The M mount is 47mm in diameter and the RF mount is 54mm in diameter.
> 
> An APS-C RF mount cameras could be as small as the M line.
> 
> ...


And the flange depth is only 2mm difference, which is nothing


----------



## Boblblawslawblg (Sep 2, 2020)

Well, I'm just gonna say it - this is dumb. Apparently if you want a decent camera now, you will need to buy into a system with Super Expensive lenses. The R system is nice, but I'm just trying to take photos of my cats in the back yard or of my friends doing dumb stuff. Just really personal mementos. I would never buy a FF camera, its too expensive. An RP with a 50mm f/1.2 is damn near $4k. An M6ii with a 32mm f/1.4 is well under 2k. 

Lowest quality body with a fast 50mm $4k.

Highest quality body with fast 50mm equivalent $1750. 

For $4k I can get a body, a 22mm, a 32mm, a 56mm, a 15-45mm zoom, a 65mm macro and a 18-200mm zoom with a bag and warranties. For what I'm shooting there is no need for more. 

Ill buy the new M flagship as long as it checks the boxes and then I'm done for the next decade if this is the choice. Ill wait for the R brand to come down and buy them second hand so Canon can eat it. This is an anti consumer move that limits choice.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Sep 2, 2020)

Boblblawslawblg said:


> Well, I'm just gonna say it - this is dumb. Apparently if you want a decent camera now, you will need to buy into a system with Super Expensive lenses. The R system is nice, but I'm just trying to take photos of my cats in the back yard or of my friends doing dumb stuff. Just really personal mementos. I would never buy a FF camera, its too expensive. An RP with a 50mm f/1.2 is damn near $4k. An M6ii with a 32mm f/1.4 is well under 2k.
> 
> Lowest quality body with a fast 50mm $4k.
> 
> ...



The point is an APS-C RF body would necessitate cheaper APS-C-only lenses of the sort you mention. The benefit would be if you wanted, you could also use regular RF lenses on that body. And you could pick and choose. And eventually get a full-frame body if you were really serious about it. But wouldn't have to. There is no path for M users to become more serious about photography other than ditching the entire system.


----------



## Boblblawslawblg (Sep 2, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> The point is an APS-C RF body would necessitate cheaper APS-C-only lenses of the sort you mention. The benefit would be if you wanted, you could also use regular RF lenses on that body. And you could pick and choose. And eventually get a full-frame body if you were really serious about it. But wouldn't have to. There is no path for M users to become more serious about photography other than ditching the entire system.


And the lenses I bought already - FML I guess. They got my money, no need to support the product anymore. AND thats why I'm out. I'm looking at a bunch of lenses that I'm being told to GFMS with. If this was the case they should have never put out an M6ii. Why put out a camera you won't support lens wise for more than a year? Thats a POS move in my opinion. If I do go FF, which Im not planning to, it most likely wont be with Canon.


----------



## mb66energy (Sep 2, 2020)

If they let die the EOS M series they should use there patent with an adjustable flange distance to make adaption of M lenses possible.
But I think EOS M will stay a while and there is some negative headroom to make EOS M cameras still smaller, thinking of a cube shaped EOS M or similar designs which fit still better in a lens compartment than the existing ones.
And I think the M system should stay for a while - it is a great system for me because I do not like ultra wide for everything but I do like it sometimes and a tiny M system is absolutely sufficient quality wise for me! And there are pros who travel a lot: Better to have two M5 or M6ii bodies than one R5 ... as backup ...


----------



## goldenhusky (Sep 2, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> Even when the average M user is never likely to buy an R body costing twice as much, and lenses costing twice as much? I think M users are less interested in upgrading to the more expensive R/RF ecosystem. I discount people here as being representative of the larger M segment.
> 
> And if Canon does drop it and only gives me the option to ditch all my kit, then when I come to having to replace my Ms as they’re no longer repairable, if Canon doesn’t offer significantly better than Fuji then my M funds will go to them.



you are assuming the RF crop bodies are going to be expensive. What if Canon comes up with similar priced bodies like EF-M mount but with RF mount? And on the Fuji wish you good luck with the price. One thing stopped me from even trying Fuji is their lens prices. If you compare equivalent Fuji lenses with other full frame lenses, they are equal or expensive than the full frame lenses we have with Canon, Nikon or Sony. Fuji sounds like a great system but at a cost disadvantage when compared to other full frame systems. Third party lenses for Fuji is also comparatively less. 

I have said this before here and I still believe ditching EF-M mount makes sense from business point of view for Canon because now they can sell the same camera and same lenses with a RF mount to the same set of consumers one more time. Based on Canon' history prior to EF mount they are not afraid to change mount at all. People will suck it up like they suck Apple products


----------



## twoheadedboy (Sep 2, 2020)

Boblblawslawblg said:


> And the lenses I bought already - FML I guess. They got my money, no need to support the product anymore. AND thats why I'm out. I'm looking at a bunch of lenses that I'm being told to GFMS with. If this was the case they should have never put out an M6ii. Why put out a camera you won't support lens wise for more than a year? Thats a POS move in my opinion. If I do go FF, which Im not planning to, it most likely wont be with Canon.



The situation is the same now. You can be happy with what you have, or you can completely ditch your system for something else (Canon or otherwise). That has been the situation with the M mount from day 1. For the record I completely agree with you, producing a new better M body when you have no intention on supporting the mount long-term is penny-wise and pound-foolish. 

I was strongly considering investing in the M system for my wife's primary camera, and to have something small when my R system isn't feasible or allowed, and now I am second-guessing that. We definitely need more insight from Canon on what they will or won't do with this line.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 2, 2020)

Boblblawslawblg said:


> And the lenses I bought already - FML I guess. They got my money, no need to support the product anymore. AND thats why I'm out. I'm looking at a bunch of lenses that I'm being told to GFMS with. If this was the case they should have never put out an M6ii. Why put out a camera you won't support lens wise for more than a year? Thats a POS move in my opinion. If I do go FF, which Im not planning to, it most likely wont be with Canon.



You're over-reacting. Not because this would be a bad thing to have happen--you're right, it would be.

But because this is just a damned rumor, not a "for certain" thing.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 2, 2020)

Boblblawslawblg said:


> And the lenses I bought already - FML I guess. They got my money, no need to support the product anymore. AND thats why I'm out. I'm looking at a bunch of lenses that I'm being told to GFMS with. If this was the case they should have never put out an M6ii. Why put out a camera you won't support lens wise for more than a year? Thats a POS move in my opinion. If I do go FF, which Im not planning to, it most likely wont be with Canon.


Products are not supported forever. None in the world are.

Yeah, they’re putting out a new model. People buying it are probably already in the M system. At any rate, people are not entitled to lifetime support.

When I lived in the desert I had a 1999 Suburban 4x4. I used it for back country trips. 12 years later, GMC quit stocking a whole load of replacement parts. So what? Products come and go.

You are angry or offended that Canon might have decided the M line isn’t viable long term? *sniffle*

Some of you people take business decisions far too personally. Yup, Canon got your money. In exchange, you got everything you’re entitled to and paid for. You aren’t owed any more than that.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 2, 2020)

SteveC said:


> You're over-reacting. Not because this would be a bad thing to have happen--you're right, it would be.
> 
> But because this is just a damned rumor, not a "for certain" thing.


The end of a product line has to happen at some point in time. Those buying at the end of a product cycle may not be happy, but as long as you get good service from what you bought then complaining is just gratuitous.


----------



## Colorado (Sep 2, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Some of you people take business decisions far too personally. Yup, Canon got your money. In exchange, you got everything you’re entitled to and paid for. You aren’t owed any more than that.


While this is technically correct it isn't the whole picture. Part of the attraction to a ILC system is the mount and the family of available lenses. Imagine if Canon came out with a high MP R3 next year but it used the RF+ mount and wasn't compatible with any of the RF lenses. And then the R1 comes out and it used the RF++ mount which in turn wasn't compatible with either the EF, RF, or RF+ mount lenses. Did an R5 user who spend thousands of dollars on RF lenses get what they paid for? Yes. Would it be understandable that they could be annoyed by the quick changing of mount systems? Also yes.


----------



## amorse (Sep 2, 2020)

Well, this topic got a lot of attention in the rumour from yesterday so no need to re-hash all that. Lots of different opinions in there - all well and good.

The rumoured lack of plans for EOS-M in 2021 here seems to be in contrast with the CR1 rumour from Aug 29 regarding an M7 camera coming in 2021, and admittedly releasing a high-end M camera right before ending support seems like an odd move. With that said, over the last while we've seen rumours of a high-end M7 camera, a high end crop sensor RF body built for speed, and the registration of a camera with a DS model number thought to be an M camera despite DS usually being reserved for EF/EFS/RF mount bodies. I kind of wonder if all those rumours are actually relating to one camera body, and the multiple sources are each reporting the limited information they have and making some assumptions to fill their information gaps. For instance, I wonder if that M7 rumour is coming from a source who knows a mirrorless crop body is coming and assumed it was an M, or if the rumour of the RF crop sensor body is actually the M7. Or it could definitely be just a planning disruption. I guess we'll know eventually!


----------



## bbasiaga (Sep 2, 2020)

Here I am, just having seen my first M body in real life and having loved the idea of it, to find out it may be the end of the line. Is this why no one has an M50 in stock in the USA? 

Until this past weekend, I was firmly in the camp of 'what is this M system even good for'. I just couldn't get it from the spec sheets and online pics. But seeing one in real life next to my 5D series and seeing how small it is in comparison, yet how it has many features I've become accustomed to on 'real' cameras but in a point and shoot sized body...I get it now. There are a lot of places we go thinking its just not worth to bring the DSLR since we won't be photography focused, but this M sized body would come with if we had one. And so much better than our cell phone! 

If they did go to an RF mount instead, which makes sense from a lot of perspectives, I'm worried it just wouldn't be the same. 47mm vs 54mm doesn't sound like a lot, but that is ~20% larger. that will translate directly to the height of the body, though not necessarily the width and thickness. Plus you've got to consider the lens itself won't be as compact either. Wait and see I guess. The good thing is the M series I buy now will likely work for 5-10 more years regardless. And I don't even need a large lens selection. That isn't the idea for me. I have that with my EF system right now. I just want something with better quality and more creative control than my cell phone and most PnS cameras. Maybe that M50 will come back in stock some day...

-Brian


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 2, 2020)

Colorado said:


> While this is technically correct it isn't the whole picture. Part of the attraction to a ILC system is the mount and the family of available lenses. Imagine if Canon came out with a high MP R3 next year but it used the RF+ mount and wasn't compatible with any of the RF lenses. And then the R1 comes out and it used the RF++ mount which in turn wasn't compatible with either the EF, RF, or RF+ mount lenses. Did an R5 user who spend thousands of dollars on RF lenses get what they paid for? Yes. Would it be understandable that they could be annoyed by the quick changing of mount systems? Also yes.


Yeah, except your whole premise is flawed. There has not been a bunch of quick mount changes. Reality is far more reliable a world to live in than just making up something completely irrational that will never happen. The ILC market has been hammered unbelievably. Canon will do what needs to be done to survive. I believe Canon stated a couple of years ago that the path forward would be to concentrate on the high end. The low end is getting eaten alive by smartphones.


----------



## The3o5FlyGuy (Sep 2, 2020)

I wish Canon would either commit and make more lenses, or do away with the line. Canon already makes a confusing amount of cameras. I don't even know where these fit in comparison with Canon's entry level DSLR's


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 2, 2020)

The M compact concept won't die off, just the M mount 

My guess is that the M spirit will continue in some kind of RF-s mount. Everything else will be the same or even better so that Canon get more of our money as we ditch the M lenses and restock with RF-s.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 2, 2020)

I would expect to see a way to adapt M lenses to an RF-S system.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 2, 2020)

Stu_bert said:


> Even when the average M user is never likely to buy an R body costing twice as much, and lenses costing twice as much? I think M users are less interested in upgrading to the more expensive R/RF ecosystem. I discount people here as being representative of the larger M segment.
> 
> And if Canon does drop it and only gives me the option to ditch all my kit, then when I come to having to replace my Ms as they’re no longer repairable, if Canon doesn’t offer significantly better than Fuji then my M funds will go to them.



But some M users are interested in using RF lenses. Bodies like M5. M6 or higher end M are purchased by enthusiasts who might appreciate the option to use the same 100-500, 70-200 or 100mm RF macro (future) they might already have. Also this way some can use M body as backup for R. 

So even if 90% will not buy RF lenses, it still makes sense to simplify the lineup and make a common mount.


----------



## nchoh (Sep 2, 2020)

This rumor seems to be in line with all the facts (and rumors) that we know so far. 1) the market for cameras is in huge decline. 2) the next M camera is going to have a SKU(?) that is not of the point and shoot (PS_xxx) but of the regular camera team. I take it to mean that the PS team is being shut down and consolidated in some way or another into a single team for cameras.

Obviously just looking at the trajectory of the the camera market tells us that cost will need to be cut in order to realign to the shrinking market. However, I don't think that Canon has fully fleshed out what it is going to do in terms of the M series camera line.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Sep 2, 2020)

This back and forth with the EOS M's future is getting tiring IMO. Multiple rumors have stated that two M bodies and some EF-M lenses are coming this year. There may not be anything on the current 2021 roadmap due to items coming out this year. And like the article stated, the roadmap may be updated in the 4th quarter of 2020 after those rumored EOS M products are either launched and/or the launch dates are solidified.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 2, 2020)

The M series has been the only APS-C camera that I like. My main cameras were 5D series.
I hope they make at least one high end M before scrapping the project.
The lens line up is small, but the 11-22, 22 f/2 and 32 f/1.4 are the best affordable lenses of their kind on the market. 
Give me a compact 85 f/1.8 for the M mount and I can do anything with that tiny, light weight package.


----------



## Dragon (Sep 2, 2020)

Lots of opinions, but not a lot of physics. If you have an R body the size of an M body, it won't be any better at handling those big RF FF lenses than the M body would. Yes, the lenses will fit, but you won't be able to hold them sensibly. The logic behind making all the M lenses small and light is impeccable. The system works and works well. The lenses vary from quite decent to very good (e.g. 11-22) and they are all quite portable. If they make an M body with Ibis, then a compact mirror lens would make sense for a telephoto. I currently use an old Tamron 500mm f/8 mirror on my M5 and other than the somewhat challenging manual focus and lack of IS, the results are quite good (see attached and note the DOF is about 1/3 of a hummingbird thick). The lens is quite small and easy to hold on the M5. And, yes I have an R5 on order, but it won't replace the M5 and its kit. It will be interesting to see how the IBIS works the mirror lenses, though.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Sep 2, 2020)

In the words of Phil Collins:

Su Su SONY!!


----------



## Baron_Karza (Sep 2, 2020)

[C0] ?


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 2, 2020)

Dragon said:


> Lots of opinions, but not a lot of physics. If you have an R body the size of an M body, it won't be any better at handling those big R FF lenses than the M body would.
> ,
> View attachment 192571


Who says it has to handle the big RF lenses ? How many people put an EF 70-200/2.8 on a Rebel ? If the RF mount is the future then cheaper bodies and smaller (cheaper) lenses will follow.


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 2, 2020)

From my own observations of photographers I know here in the USA, the M just isn't small enough to compete against smartphones, nor "good" enough to compete against full-frame. Pros I knowwho want something for "off duty" go with a Samsung or Apple phone. 

The M might very well be an excellent camera filling a gap for passionate photographers who don't want the bulk and expense of a FF camera--or even ef-s. But the enthusiasts I'm seeing here in my area are leaning towards Olympus, which has had IBIS for some time now. I'm friends or familiar with about 50 very enthusiastic photographers. Not one of them has an M. Just one person's perspective.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Sep 2, 2020)

Is this article the same as the below article from just a few days ago but just to continue with traffic on the topic? 

M is Dead


----------



## Waldo (Sep 2, 2020)

I am waiting - trying hard to decide on a direction. However, the current 'confusing' rumours on high end M and APS-C R have been around in one form or another for some months and don't make decision making any easier. My dilemma is that I want to upgrade from my 600D with a small mix of EF and EF-S lenses but no 'L' series. I want to upgrade to mirrorless and the M series appeals as it continues the APS-C format and is small and light . I am still learning the digital world and major on landscape, but naturally do something of almost everything. In a logical world I would be going for a high end FF R series but, as I do a lot of walking etc, I want as light a package as practical but still with some quality. The forthcoming M series sounds pretty much ideal but, as noted elsewhere, the quality M series lenses to support it are still lacking ...... I wish Canon would publish some definitive plan!!!!


----------



## Czardoom (Sep 2, 2020)

As some have mentioned, it certainly makes a lot more sense in the long run, if all the Canon ILMCs had the same mount. So if Canon can make APS-C bodies and lenses that are similar in size and weight to the M line, then it will probably happen. If it does, it will be pretty seamless in my opinion.

As usual, the folks on this forum are forgetting the M target consumer. When their M50 or M6 II is no longer working, or they are looking to replace it in 5-10 years, they will go to Best Buy or look online, and they will see if there is a Canon camera that is similar to their M. They won't care what it is called, they probably won't care if it is APS-C or FF, they will want one of the the smallest, inexpensive Canon models. If they say to the salesman, I only want the body, I already have a lens or two, the salesman will let them know that their M lenses will no longer work on the camera...but, here is the kit with lens for only $150 dollars more. OK, deal done. 

Yes, I understand that having lenses that will no longer work if the line is discontinued will be annoying (as an Olympus M4/3 owner, the future of my camera and lenses is up in the air), but generally speaking, M owners will have paid well under $1000 for all of their lenses and will have gotten many years use out of them. If this had happened to the EF lenses, where a typical user may have spent many thousands of dollars on lenses, the loss would be substantial. The M target consumer - in the majority of cases - may never have bought anyhting but the kit lens. Not a great loss.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 2, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Who says it has to handle the big RF lenses ? How many people put an EF 70-200/2.8 on a Rebel ? If the RF mount is the future then cheaper bodies and smaller (cheaper) lenses will follow.



Actually i've seen quite a few using a bunch of L lenses on Rebels, like 70-200 variants, 100-400 and even big whites like 500mm. It's nice to have options.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 2, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> From my own observations of photographers I know here in the USA, the M just isn't small enough to compete against smartphones, nor "good" enough to compete against full-frame. Pros I knowwho want something for "off duty" go with a Samsung or Apple phone.
> 
> The M might very well be an excellent camera filling a gap for passionate photographers who don't want the bulk and expense of a FF camera--or even ef-s. But the enthusiasts I'm seeing here in my area are leaning towards Olympus, which has had IBIS for some time now. I'm friends or familiar with about 50 very enthusiastic photographers. Not one of them has an M. Just one person's perspective.



The M is great for travel tho. I love to take it with me on travels because it's really small with 1 or 2 lenses, you can even put the 22mm prime in your pocket.
Not as small as a smartphone but small enough to take it everywhere.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 2, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Actually i've seen quite a few using a bunch of L lenses on Rebels, like 70-200 variants, 100-400 and even big whites like 500mm. It's nice to have options.


Yes there are some, but it's few and far between when you consider the amount of Rebels out there. However, like you say, it's nice to have options. I've used my 135L on my daughter's 1100D


----------



## Baron_Karza (Sep 2, 2020)

"I am told that there is nothing in regards to the EOS M in the 2021 roadmap"


Baron_Karza said:


> In the words of Phil Collins:
> 
> Su Su SONY!!



Actually, since my gf already has a couple of Sony A6xxx cameras, I'm not gonna go Sony.

If there will be another M50 _like_ camera, even if the last M ever, I'll still get it as long as they add IBIS to it.
I already have all the lens I'll ever want for it: 
15-45 kit
55-200 kit
+ EF adapter for my FF lenses

11-22 <--I may get this one too, just wish it was faster (would sacrifice long end to keep size down)


R6 and 6400 would take care of everything else


----------



## Whowe (Sep 2, 2020)

How come no one is talking about the Rebel Series? Seriously, there has to be a plan for that series. That would include $400-$500 bodies and $700-$900 kits. this is also a huge sales point for Canon. I always thought the low end of the M-series would be directed toward that market.


----------



## Czardoom (Sep 2, 2020)

Waldo said:


> I am waiting - trying hard to decide on a direction. However, the current 'confusing' rumours on high end M and APS-C R have been around in one form or another for some months and don't make decision making any easier. My dilemma is that I want to upgrade from my 600D with a small mix of EF and EF-S lenses but no 'L' series. I want to upgrade to mirrorless and the M series appeals as it continues the APS-C format and is small and light . I am still learning the digital world and major on landscape, but naturally do something of almost everything. In a logical world I would be going for a high end FF R series but, as I do a lot of walking etc, I want as light a package as practical but still with some quality. The forthcoming M series sounds pretty much ideal but, as noted elsewhere, the quality M series lenses to support it are still lacking ...... I wish Canon would publish some definitive plan!!!!


I am sure Canon has no definitive plan, with the Camera market, and the Covid and post-Covid economy, in flux. I am sure they were going to release a 5D V, but recent rumors indicate otherwise due to the unexpected success of the R5 and R6. I think, to a certain extent, they will be throwing various cameras out there and see what sticks. On the other hand, I would see no reason not to go with your plan of buying an M camera and a small mix of EF and EF-S lenses. If they discontinue the M line in 2021 0r 2022, what difference will that make to you. The M camera and the lenses you buy will last for years. If you decide to get an R camera in the future, all your EF and EF-S lenses will work fine on that. Since your plan did not include getting any M lenses, I see no reason to change your mind due to an online rumor. And, quite frankly, unless you are a pixel peeper, the M lenses are just fine and some are excellent. The best thing to do, of course (if possible) is to rent an M series camera and whatever lenses you are interested in, and see if you like it.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Sep 2, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Who says it has to handle the big RF lenses ? How many people put an EF 70-200/2.8 on a Rebel ? If the RF mount is the future then cheaper bodies and smaller (cheaper) lenses will follow.



I put an EF 70-300mm L lens on my M6 Mark II . And do understand that a camera body can only be so small compared to it's mount. This is one reason why Canon originally went with a smaller diameter mount for the EOS M system.


----------



## Colorado (Sep 2, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Yeah, except your whole premise is flawed. There has not been a bunch of quick mount changes. Reality is far more reliable a world to live in than just making up something completely irrational that will never happen. The ILC market has been hammered unbelievably. Canon will do what needs to be done to survive. I believe Canon stated a couple of years ago that the path forward would be to concentrate on the high end. The low end is getting eaten alive by smartphones.


To be clear I don't have any skin in this game. I don't own and M-line camera so it can be continued or discontinued and I won't be affected. My point is that the latest batch of rumors aren't consistent. Canon has two choices:

(1) End of life the EF-M camera line and lenses. Budget market is either conceded to smartphones or an APC sized RF camera is produced.
(2) Continue the EF-M camera and lenses if market studies show that it is distinct enough from an APC RF camera and smartphones to be profitable.

What they can't (or shouldn't) do:

Release two new EF-M bodies including a cadilac model with professional features but then immediately (as in within a year) end of life the EF-M mount and produce zero lenses that would match well with a high end EF-M camera. If someone paid $1500 for a high end EF-M camera and then found out Canon had no plans to support it with lenses I would understand if they were annoyed.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 2, 2020)

Sibir Lupus said:


> I put an EF 70-300mm L lens on my M6 Mark II . And do understand that a camera body can only be so small compared to it's mount. This is one reason why Canon originally went with a smaller diameter mount for the EOS M system.



I've done the 100-400 II L, on my M6 Mark II. Worked tolerably well photographing snow leopards at the San Diego Zoo.


----------



## koketso (Sep 2, 2020)

I call BS.

Canon is still working on their roadmap and lo-and-behold we will be hearing rumours of the next M camera (with EF-M mount) in the next few months as things get back to normal.


----------



## Dragon (Sep 2, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Who says it has to handle the big RF lenses ? How many people put an EF 70-200/2.8 on a Rebel ? If the RF mount is the future then cheaper bodies and smaller (cheaper) lenses will follow.


An APS-C R would be be perfectly functional with smaller lenses, but but most of the folks bloviating here are talking about a 7DII replacement. A 7D II is considerably bigger in every dimension than an R5 and 23% heavier. That is a good piece of what makes it popular for use with big lenses. A much smaller (than R5) body is NOT a functional replacement for a 7DII (at least for the crowd that is wishing).


----------



## unfocused (Sep 2, 2020)

I have been and continue to be skeptical. 

On the other hand, I _*can*_ believe that Canon's endgame is to consolidate all its bodies into a single mount and eventually retire the EF, EF-S and M mounts. They may have already decided that that is where they want to end up and the debate is over how soon they can get there while still expanding their market share. (And, let's not forget that for Canon, it will always be about increasing their market share.)

The diameter of the RF system lens mount would limit how small they could make their future APS-C bodies (It looks like a little more than a 1/4 inch difference in diameter). Would that make a huge difference in portability? I'm guessing that would depend on whether or not the overall size of the body would have to be larger and my other guess is that the length of the lens and the front element diameter of the lens is more important. 

The nice thing about moving to the RF system for everything is that you can have complete interchangeability between lenses -- you can mount an APS-C lens on a full frame and have the camera crop the field of view. And, of course, you can mount a full frame lens on the APS-C body just like you could with the EF system. 

For those M buyers that will never buy any lens except the one that came with the camera, there would be no concern about dropping the line. So, it only affects those who actually use the interchangeable lens feature of the M. Only Canon knows what percentage of customers they represent, but it is probably smaller than we imagine. 

Canon could begin introducing RF mount APS-C bodies and lenses in the next 1-2 years and take another five years or so to transition away from the M mount. They could follow a similar timetable for the Rebel series and probably a 7-10 year transition for the EF series (introducing a amalgamation of the 6D and 5D sometime in the next year -- as previous rumors have hinted) and possibly offering one more version of the 1Dx, depending on how rapidly the professional market adopts the R5. 

Of course, this assumes that Canon actually wants to get out of the DSLR market, which I am still doubtful about. I think it is entirely possible that Canon hasn't decided anything yet, but is following the market to see what consumers do. 

As a 1Dx III user *and* an R user, I still find many advantages to the DSLR that will be very difficult to overcome with a mirrorless body and I don't buy the argument that Canon can't afford to keep both lines going. I suspect that Canon has not closed the door on anything yet and won't until they are confident that any decision they make will expand, not reduce sales.


----------



## PiezoSwitch (Sep 2, 2020)

There is a real and distinct size advantage to the M series. At a minimum any R APS-C body must have a complement of pancake lenses to provide a similar level of portability. There is a quality gap with the resolution of the new 32mb sensor and the vast majority of existing EF-M lenses which is also signals of a lack of commitment. Sad to see.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 2, 2020)

unfocused said:


> The diameter of the RF system lens mount would limit how small they could make their future APS-C bodies (It looks like a little more than a 1/4 inch difference in diameter). Would that make a huge difference in portability?


Put a RF mount on an M5 and it only looks slightly more ridiculous than the EF mount on the SL series, so an R series replacement for the M series could be pretty damn small, and as you say, it makes sense for Canon going forward to focus on one mount, and smaller, lighter APS-c lenses would seal the deal for many.


----------



## Dragon (Sep 2, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> Is this article the same as the below article from just a few days ago but just to continue with traffic on the topic?
> 
> M is Dead


CR does seem to latch on to anything negative about the M-line.


----------



## docsmith (Sep 2, 2020)

This is what I like about already owning gear. I'll just keep using my M6 II.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Sep 2, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I've done the 100-400 II L, on my M6 Mark II. Worked tolerably well photographing snow leopards at the San Diego Zoo.



Tolerably well would be about sum up my experience with the 70-300mm L lens on my M6 Mark II heh. I can't imagine carrying around a lens like this on a much heavier DSLR like an 5D Mark IV or 1DX Mark III .


----------



## SteveC (Sep 2, 2020)

Sibir Lupus said:


> Tolerably well would be about sum up my experience with the 70-300mm L lens on my M6 Mark II heh. I can't imagine carrying around a lens like this on a much heavier DSLR like an 5D Mark IV or 1DX Mark III .



There was a railing I could use to prop the camera + lens up. I think I posted one of the pics over in the zoo animals thread.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Sep 2, 2020)

Sibir Lupus said:


> I put an EF 70-300mm L lens on my M6 Mark II . And do understand that a camera body can only be so small compared to it's mount. This is one reason why Canon originally went with a smaller diameter mount for the EOS M system.



Serious question:

When using large lenses, how do you guys hold the system?

For those saying that certain bodies are too small, can't you just told the camera with one hand, and then the lens with the other hand where that hand is slid further away from the camera (further up the lens) than when used with a heavier body?


----------



## Baron_Karza (Sep 2, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Put a RF mount on an M5 and it only looks slightly more ridiculous than the EF mount on the SL series, so an R series replacement for the M series could be pretty damn small, and as you say, it makes sense for Canon going forward to focus on one mount, and smaller, lighter APS-c lenses would seal the deal for many.



but as a complete system, the RF mount lenses will never be as small as the EF-M.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 2, 2020)

Colorado said:


> To be clear I don't have any skin in this game. I don't own and M-line camera so it can be continued or discontinued and I won't be affected. My point is that the latest batch of rumors aren't consistent. Canon has two choices:
> 
> (1) End of life the EF-M camera line and lenses. Budget market is either conceded to smartphones or an APC sized RF camera is produced.
> (2) Continue the EF-M camera and lenses if market studies show that it is distinct enough from an APC RF camera and smartphones to be profitable.
> ...


True, but let’s be sure to understand that the Cadillac model you envision ($1,500) is already far past the RP in price and way past the rumored FF budget model. So, in my opinion, M becomes moot when the high end APSC R is also released.

Anyway, bodies have a shelf life. People buy a camera and lenses. Would I be upset with Canon if I paid $1500 for a Cadillac M and Canon decided to drop the line? No. Inconvenient for me? Probably. However, that camera will still work along with the lenses for years to come. So at what point, years down the road, do whiners decide to get over their juvenile disappointment and move on? Canon never promised a full range of lenses for that system.


----------



## Colorado (Sep 2, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> So at what point, years down the road, do whiners decide to get over their juvenile disappointment and move on? Canon never promised a full range of lenses for that system.


Well I was with you until this last part. If Canon releases 2 new M series cameras in 2021 with no intention of continuing the line I think people have a right to be annoyed without being labeled juvenile whiners. I guess you just seem really aggressive in your tone and I don't understand. 

But like I said, I'm not in the market for an M-series camera so more just curious what camera manufacturers do to survive the shrinking market.


----------



## vxcalais (Sep 3, 2020)

Slightly disappointed after buying a M6ii after using Sony APS-C for 7 years. When I saw the M6ii and what an improvement it was to the APS-C class it made sense Canon would make new Lenses. The best thing I did was hold on to all my Sony Lenses. So in a few years time if Canon does kill off the M line then I can go back to Sony. The M6ii is perfect for me and will last me quite a few years still. But lenses are definitely lacking. Sony killed it with their constant F4 lenses like the 18-105mm. I don't know why Canon can't do one similar. But the Camera market is contracting fast with improvements to Camera phones.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Sep 3, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Canon never promised a full range of lenses for that system.



No system really promises that, but the expectation is their when buying into any system. Why would anyone buy into a system with a fair amount of lenses if they knew ahead of time that that company would only ever make a few bodies and a few lenses to go along with them?


----------



## SteveC (Sep 3, 2020)

Sibir Lupus said:


> No system really promises that, but the expectation is their when buying into any system. Why would anyone buy into a system with a fair amount of lenses if they knew ahead of time that that company would only ever make a few bodies and a few lenses to go along with them?



From the looks of your signature, you're almost pure M and have been for years! Just one big EF lens to go with it.


----------



## Jethro (Sep 3, 2020)

Sibir Lupus said:


> No system really promises that, but the expectation is their when buying into any system. Why would anyone buy into a system with a fair amount of lenses if they knew ahead of time that that company would only ever make a few bodies and a few lenses to go along with them?


Yes, but very many M series buyers get a kit lens (or maybe 2) when they buy the body, and never buy another. Some (like yourself) do buy (or adapt) other lenses - bu I think Canon really want the likes of you to move up to RF mount FF bodies ...


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 3, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> but as a complete system, the RF mount lenses will never be as small as the EF-M.
> 
> View attachment 192574



That's an extreme example. I bet a F4 version would be much smaller. In my opinion, a 55-200 lens in RF mount with F6.3 at 200mm would not be much bigger than the M version.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 3, 2020)

Jethro said:


> Yes, but very many M series buyers get a kit lens (or maybe 2) when they buy the body, and never buy another. Some (like yourself) do buy (or adapt) other lenses - bu I think Canon really want the likes of you to move up to RF mount FF bodies ...



Except they will never be as conveniently small as the M series.

I have an R5. I had it in my mitts 10AM the first day.

I've taken more photos with my M6-II than with the R5 since that day. It's my go-to for opportunity shots.


----------



## basketballfreak6 (Sep 3, 2020)

Even if Canon kills off the M series I'd still keep using my M6II until the day it dies. The camera + 32mm + 11-22mm combo is amazing for daily walk around use and going hiking etc; it's the reason why I hardly use my 5D4 these days.



SteveC said:


> Except they will never be as conveniently small as the M series.
> 
> I have an R5. I had it in my mitts 10AM the first day.
> 
> I've taken more photos with my M6-II than with the R5 since that day. It's my go-to for opportunity shots.



Pretty much that; I'd still haul my 5D4 and lenses for planned shoots and jobs but for everything else the M6II is perfect.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 3, 2020)

Colorado said:


> Well I was with you until this last part. If Canon releases 2 new M series cameras in 2021 with no intention of continuing the line I think people have a right to be annoyed without being labeled juvenile whiners. I guess you just seem really aggressive in your tone and I don't understand.
> 
> But like I said, I'm not in the market for an M-series camera so more just curious what camera manufacturers do to survive the shrinking market.


If they are annoyed it is because they choose to be. They can buy it or not buy it. They can also choose to be annoyed or not. Canon never promised anyone a perpetual product line. I bought a brand new Ford Focus in 2013. Why should I be annoyed that Ford dropped the line? Does it hurt me? No.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 3, 2020)

Sibir Lupus said:


> No system really promises that, but the expectation is their when buying into any system. Why would anyone buy into a system with a fair amount of lenses if they knew ahead of time that that company would only ever make a few bodies and a few lenses to go along with them?


I don't know. When I buy something I get it for what it is today. The M has been around since 2012. 8 years and the lens catalog for that line has always been small. After 8 years, it is presumptuous to believe that Canon is going to suddenly sink a lot of development into that when that segment is getting hammered. The newly rumored M has probably been in development for 2-3 years. I would think that M fans would be happy to get one last great model. Instead, they fret that after 8 years their expectations were mirages. These were not expectations fueled by Canon. They were dreams manufactured in the minds of some of the M owners and forum dwellers. I understand that people really enjoy those cameras.


----------



## slclick (Sep 3, 2020)

timmy_650 said:


> I don’t think canon knows what they will do. I think they have ideas but they are smart enough to sell things that consumers want. If the M is still selling well in two years, they will keep it alive. They don’t have to spend much on development


Roadmaps, they have them, we don't. We have things like the words 'cripple' and '*******'. They are smart. We are a bunch of maroons.


----------



## slclick (Sep 3, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> If they are annoyed it is because they choose to be. They can buy it or not buy it. They can also choose to be annoyed or not. Canon never promised anyone a perpetual product line. I bought a brand new Ford Focus in 2013. Why should I be annoyed that Ford dropped the line? Does it hurt me? No.


Thank you, the analogy is much needed here. The user base who feels entitled is misrepresented by forum dolts but still we must endure their constant whining and cripple/******* comments. Times were (film days mostly) most shooters were intelligent and interesting folx but nowadays anyone on the spectrum is a photog!


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Sep 3, 2020)

There's been talk about the M system's demise since the original M came out! Anyways, nothing new from Canon: they shed lens mounts as often as reptiles shed skins.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 3, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> If they are annoyed it is because they choose to be. They can buy it or not buy it. They can also choose to be annoyed or not. Canon never promised anyone a perpetual product line. I bought a brand new Ford Focus in 2013. Why should I be annoyed that Ford dropped the line? Does it hurt me? No.


To be fair, that's a pretty bad analogy. Your 2013 Ford Focus came with an attached engine. If you bought the body thinking that you would be able to pick from a range of engines in the future, you might be a little bit annoyed.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> To be fair, that's a pretty bad analogy. Your 2013 Ford Focus came with an attached engine. If you bought the body thinking that you would be able to pick from a range of engines in the future, you might be a little bit annoyed.



Yes, the analogy would be closer to describing a point and shoot line being discontinued.


----------



## Stu_bert (Sep 3, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> EXACTLY! The M system is popular because of the size. And if Canon can create a uniform lens mount system across ALL lines AND still make subcompact, M sized RF mount APSC bodies, there is no reason to maintain the M line. Because people who want small cameras largely dont care whether the name is M or RF so long as they are comparably small. We have not yet seen one single RF-C lens yet. But they are probably going to be very compact like the M line, even if the throat is 7mm bigger. If Canon feels they can maintain or grow their market from M to RF-C, then they will. The cost savings and profit potential would be much better.
> 
> Now the first RF-C will probably be standard sized bodies like a 7D replacement. But it wont be long before we see some subcompact RF-C bodies moving into M territory. Canon seems to have little to no interest in making M lenses, but they are cranking out glass and patents for RF like water from a broken hydrant



Except if you offer no backwards compatibility then you have no stickiness and potentially alienate those consumers

Re lens capacity - yes that reflects the target segment and what they want / will buy / will pay. Lower number of lenses doesn’t reflect commitment...


----------



## Stu_bert (Sep 3, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> The point is an APS-C RF body would necessitate cheaper APS-C-only lenses of the sort you mention. The benefit would be if you wanted, you could also use regular RF lenses on that body. And you could pick and choose. And eventually get a full-frame body if you were really serious about it. But wouldn't have to. There is no path for M users to become more serious about photography other than ditching the entire system.



The point is if you don’t offer any migration then you have no stickiness and people are free to chose any system. I get that many people may like future proof, but I don’t see many people who bought the M expecting to have compatibility with the R / Rf range. Completely different segments.


----------



## slclick (Sep 3, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Yes, the analogy would be closer to describing a point and shoot line being discontinued.


You two, fun at parties I bet


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 3, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> Serious question:
> 
> When using large lenses, how do you guys hold the system?
> 
> For those saying that certain bodies are too small, can't you just told the camera with one hand, and then the lens with the other hand where that hand is slid further away from the camera (further up the lens) than when used with a heavier body?



That works, until you need to use one hand to keep nature out of the shot, like grass and reeds. On my original M I have a Franiec grip, which improves things a lot. An M + MP-E65 + MT24-Ex is no trouble. I start having trouble with long, front heavy lenses, like the 100-400II. 
The M6II is a lot bigger than the original M, but I still prefer to use the Smallrig L-bracket with that, it gives it that extra bit it needs with a 100-400II .

FWIW, I need the EG-E1 on my RP to make it work with anything bigger than the EF85/1.8.

But I mainly like my Ms for their size, I really wish Canon would release an updated version of the original M: sized like the M200, but with a hot shoe.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 3, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I don't know. When I buy something I get it for what it is today. The M has been around since 2012. 8 years and the lens catalog for that line has always been small. After 8 years, it is presumptuous to believe that Canon is going to suddenly sink a lot of development into that when that segment is getting hammered. The newly rumored M has probably been in development for 2-3 years. I would think that M fans would be happy to get one last great model. Instead, they fret that after 8 years their expectations were mirages. These were not expectations fueled by Canon. They were dreams manufactured in the minds of some of the M owners and forum dwellers. I understand that people really enjoy those cameras.



For a long time the M line was basically the mimimum viable product, but I got my hopes up after the M50, 32mm f/1.4 and M6II. Especially since the M6II had more features than it's half-sibling 90D, which implies more effort being spent on the M than the rebel.

OTOH, if you look at the timing of the M50 and M6II, they seem to be test models for upcoming R models, The M50 had a lot in common with the R, the M6II with the R5. So it could be that Canon doesn't need to use the M series for testing new mirrorless tech with the R, RP, R5 and R6 already being out there.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 3, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> but as a complete system, the RF mount lenses will never be as small as the EF-M.
> 
> View attachment 192574


Not as small as the M mount, that's true. 

I don't see the relevance of your comparison above; one is a slow crop zoom lens, the other is a fast FF lens. 

Anyway this conjecture pales into insignificance compared with you nicking private's avatar. What have you done with him and why does he keep laughing at your posts ?


----------



## huscusahead (Sep 3, 2020)

Canon's main competitors, Nikon and Sony have one mount for FF & APS-C bodies. Canon would be crazy to duplicate effort & resources in a shrinking market across two mounts. If Canon is not to be "*******" it has to ditch M & focus on RF. I guess they could create a RF to M adapter to acquiesce M owners but they might not consider that worth the effort & cost either.


----------



## simeyesky (Sep 3, 2020)

I guess it's feasible to build bodies sized like the M50/M6 with a RF mount. Then to put the M lenses into a RF-mount housing.
Most customers buy a kit anyway, so these will buy a RF kit the same way, even when upgrading/renewing.
This essentially leaves the "enthusiasts" M users who have more than three lenses, for whose it will cost more to switch (but Canon could launch a switch trade-in program.) And in the other hand, this would allow them to benefit from all the RF lineup natively.


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Sep 3, 2020)

Don't see any potential upgrade path for EF-M lenses. If the new body is good, I guess we could keep using it for another couple of years.

Biggest problem to me is that there aren't yet enough cheap and light weight RF lenses or even crop RF lenses available.

Another problem with the RF mount is that there might never be native RF mount Tamron or Sigma lenses available (secret and encrypted lens communication protocol).


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> To be fair, that's a pretty bad analogy. Your 2013 Ford Focus came with an attached engine. If you bought the body thinking that you would be able to pick from a range of engines in the future, you might be a little bit annoyed.


If you are comparing the engine to lenses... I already had a collection of lenses (engines) before buying the rumored but still to be announced, released, purchased, doesn't yet exist, new M camera, remember? These are people already in the M line that are pissed the line will not be around much longer... yet Canon will (might) release one last body.

If I am walking around with a 2012 Ford Focus (M) and a bag full of engines (lenses) I interchange for different driving conditions, and 8 years later I get annoyed because Ford decides to discontinue the car model... yeah, a little childish. Especially since all my hopes and dreams were that Ford would eventually sell an 800cid (800mm) engine for my compact car (camera) fetish. Personally, I am still angry that AMC no longer makes cars and I can't buy a Gremlin, Hornet, or Pacer.


----------



## vxcalais (Sep 3, 2020)

What was the reason for Canon not continuing EF/EF-S ? EOS-M was the equal of Sony and recently Nikon with the single mount. DIsappointed as only recently since last year from Sony to my M6ii. After making a beast of a camera it made sense to support it via new lenses. But to no avail. The equal of the SEL18-105G with constant F4 is perfect for the EOS-M.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 3, 2020)

Boblblawslawblg said:


> Well, I'm just gonna say it - this is dumb. Apparently if you want a decent camera now, you will need to buy into a system with Super Expensive lenses. The R system is nice, but I'm just trying to take photos of my cats in the back yard or of my friends doing dumb stuff. Just really personal mementos. I would never buy a FF camera, its too expensive. An RP with a 50mm f/1.2 is damn near $4k. An M6ii with a 32mm f/1.4 is well under 2k.
> 
> Lowest quality body with a fast 50mm $4k.
> 
> ...




It's just wrong to compare to RP with a 50mm f/1.2. That's the most expensive 50mm and obviously will be a much cheaper variant very soon.
In a few months we will probably have an 50mm 1.8. Until then you can adapt the EF variant for less than $100.

The bigger problem is that cheap FF is always slow and lacks features or ergonomics compared to high-end APS-C for the same price.
With the M6 you get uncropped 4K with DPAF and 14fps (30 in crop mode), with the RP you have 4 fps with cropped 4K and unusable contrast AF in video.

Plus lenses is another thing. The 11-22 is 200g while the comparable 16-35 F4 is three times the weight. The RF 35mm 1.8 costs and weights 3 times as much as the 22mm.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Sep 3, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Not as small as the M mount, that's true.
> 
> I don't see the relevance of your comparison above; one is a slow crop zoom lens, the other is a fast FF lens.
> 
> Anyway this conjecture pales into insignificance compared with you nicking private's avatar. What have you done with him and why does he keep laughing at your posts ?


those were the smallest lenses for EF-M and R that goes to 200mm

maybe you can do better (i tried)


----------



## scrup (Sep 3, 2020)

Canon will give a farewell body like the 1DXiii. There will be an overlap where older M models will still be available simultaneously as the RF mount crop bodies.
Some folks are scared of change, its not really not that bad. 
Your old gear will still work stock up on bodies if you are afraid you will outlast the gear.


----------



## brad-man (Sep 3, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Not as small as the M mount, that's true.
> 
> I don't see the relevance of your comparison above; one is a slow crop zoom lens, the other is a fast FF lens.
> 
> Anyway this conjecture pales into insignificance compared with you _nicking private's avatar_. What have you done with him and _why does he keep laughing at your posts ?_


I am a bit curious about this as well. The baron must be a friend or family. And then there's private's new avatar...


----------



## canonmike (Sep 4, 2020)

Del Paso said:


> It would be a strange decision to abandon such a popular system, especially after having introduced the M 6II...
> Not convinced M users would rather buy a much bigger APS-C R model.
> An EOS 7 DII (future EOS R) user isn't the usual clientele for the M system, and the EOS 90 D no replacement for the M 5 or 50.
> Extreme compactness still is THE argument for the M, and, for some, it's disadvantage.
> And stupid me was just saving money for the coming "uber M"


Agree with your assessment, Del Paso.....I can throw my M50 and 22mm lens in my pocket, something I can not do with any R or RP series body and lens combo. When pack hiking, I can easily carry an extra lens of my choosing with it. If there ultimately is going to be an R series APSC body, it better be small or I won't be interested. While doing trail maintenance over sev yrs., I have damaged a 7D, a 60D, a 6D and two lenses. Due to size, they are just too difficult to protect on long hikes through rugged terrain. While not a perfect camera, by any means, the M50's small form factor and small lenses are perfect for the trail. If I was to damage my M50 and 22mm EF-M lens, for instance, while hiking, I would not be out a fortune, like I would with the wonderful but painfully expensive RF lenses, attached to an R body. That aside, however, as you say, I carry my M50 because of the small size and love it. I have sev full frame Canon bodies but only use them when size doesn't matter and I just have to have full frame capability.


----------



## Quirkz (Sep 4, 2020)

Something like the m5/m50 would work, and could be quite compact as an RF-C, but will never be as compact as the little m200 (which I adore), with the 22mm - On the m200, the body is basically the size of the lens mount. It would need to grow 7mm to fit an RF. And again, the 22mm is about the size of the lens mount. It would also need to grow. You just can't get a RF-C as compact as an M.

Maybe canon is selling a lot more m50s/m6s than they are selling m100/200's, and that's driving the decision.

If this happens, I'll just go back to my fuji for my compact setup when I finally need to upgrade/replace - I didn't sell the lenses i had.

( to be fair, I sold my m5 when I got my RP. Practically as compact since the m5 was just a bit too big to be pocketable, with much better quality/features/lenses)


----------



## ashmadux (Sep 5, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A replacement using a RP mount makes sense. It can still be a small camera, but it would simplify production to be able to have common components. You might even be able to use FF lenses or APS-C lenses on FF bodies. It never made sense to have two different and non adaptable lens systems.



No this doesnt make sense, as the lenses are generally vastly more expensive and none are even close to being compact. If this is true, they have to have something else in the works. An expensive M body could be interesting for M lovers like myself, but the compromises in build quality and dare i say not enough enthusiast lenses would make it a tough sell.

I would like to get into the RF system eventually but i woudl be forced into adobe cloud system with no alternatives (the competiion is just not there yet for a full dam + editor)..thats at least a year away (probably).


----------



## Kit Chan (Sep 7, 2020)

I bought an M200 in July as my first camera along with a 55-200mm lens and I love how compact the M line is. The camera and my 2 lenses fit in my handbag easily with room for more. I'm currently planning on getting the 32mm lens and I'll definitely be grabbing a 100-300mm as my 4th lens if the lens rumors are true. I'll likely upgrade to a M6II or M7 when I outgrow the M200 and I can get an EF adapter/Metabones speedbooster (or possible RF equivalent) for higher end lenses when I need them.

I think Canon would be smarter to release an RF adapter than to discontinue the EF M line. It's a great system for newcomers and newcomers need a variety of decent enough lenses to explore the world of photography with before they invest in the bigger gear and an RF adapter will help pave an upgrade path for M owners and keep them in Canon's ecosystem when they move up to high end gear.

I don't believe the majority of EF-M owners will only stick to the kit lens myth. Why would they buy an interchangeable lens camera if they don't want to try different lenses on it? My original plan was to buy a compact camera for casual backyard, food and family pics, but then I became inspired to explore photography more seriously and settled on this M200 instead so I could start my photographer's journey.
I definitely wouldn't own an M200 if all I wanted was casual snaps.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 7, 2020)

brad-man said:


> I am a bit curious about this as well. The baron must be a friend or family. And then there's private's new avatar...


I think actually this Baron-Karza has simply stolen Private's avatar. I'm quite astonished and somewhat disappointed that the mods have allowed it to happen, especially when privatebydesign is a long standing and respected member and contributor to the forum.


----------



## amazin (Sep 17, 2020)

I think there should be a "small" R like Sigma Fp or the new Sony A7C, or maybe 2 versions :
- a more affordable APS-C
- a FF

With smartphones photography improving at every new generation the gap between phones and small affordable camera is narrowing.

Why would Canon develop such a camera if the expected selling numbers are small?

I would for sure buy a small R as a second body.


----------

