# There will be an EOS M/EF-M announcement this year [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 3, 2021)

> Uh oh, am I going to eat crow about the future of EOS M? I don’t believe so, but I have received some pretty cryptic information about an EOS M/EF-M product launch apparently coming in 2021.
> I have been told that Canon plans to “pivot the EOS M system is a new direction”. Was this only brought to my attention because of the recent reporting about the PowerShot lineup moving in a new direction, or is there something actually to it?
> You do remember that we have seen some very in-depth patents recently showing a new type of ILC camera from Canon that appears to have an EF-M mount.
> The same source also told me that you’re going to have to wait until later in 2021 to learn more about what Canon plans to do with EOS M.
> Now I’m not going back and forth for the clicks, I’m just...



Continue reading...


----------



## DogpackChris (Feb 3, 2021)

M6 mk II with IBIS and I would be a happy camper!


----------



## jolyonralph (Feb 3, 2021)

As one of the twitter EOS-M lovers, I totally understand your call that EOS-M is on borrowed time. I agree, it is. I just think there's probably an iteration or two left in it, and maybe more if they are really innovative with the format. 

I'm not expecting to see any more EF-M lenses launched though (although that would be nice!). But the current lineup is pretty good as it is for the target market.


----------



## Dragon (Feb 3, 2021)

The only reason you would have to eat crow is if you were invested in the death of the M line. Simple reporting is not a reason to be embarrassed. Judging from the wording in some of your earlier posts, it does seem like there is some investment there . If Canon morphs M into a solid competitor for Fuji X, then we M aficionados will no doubt give you a little well deserved ribbing and a few excellent recipes for Crow.


----------



## bbb34 (Feb 3, 2021)

If EF-M goes on: good.
If they stop EF-M, there is room for something else, maybe better. Maybe RF-S lenses with a tiny diameter. Who knows.

Don't cry after outgoing technology.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Feb 3, 2021)

I still believe the EOS M series has a part to play in its current form, so do the sales numbers if stats are to be believed.

Not all! But many buyers of the EOS M series are happy snappers, like me when I’m on holiday etc! I think I can remember holidays lol

With some updates and tweaks the compact light-weight EOS M bodies and lenses are still very sought after. My EOS M5 is showing its age but I still enjoy using it and look forward to seeing newer models in the future.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 3, 2021)

I'd be really happy with a high body-quality M 5II, with ibis and a hi-pixel EVF (and a few new mini L lenses...)
Anyway, good news !


----------



## Maps (Feb 3, 2021)

A “new direction” for the M system doesn’t sound like anything to get excited about. I was perfectly happy with the “old direction” of providing really high-value, light and packable cameras at reasonable prices.


----------



## jolyonralph (Feb 3, 2021)

I wouldn't replace my EOS M cameras with an R body because there simply aren't enough compact/light/inexpensive lenses available for it.

For a lightweight travel camera - if Canon ditches the EOS M then I'd probably move over to E mount.


----------



## JoFT (Feb 3, 2021)

I still hope for a bright future of the EF-M mount. I love to carry the M6II with me and I still hope for an M5MkII - with 8stop IBIS - and some more lenses.... especially a 100-400, a 56 f1.4 (But I can live with the Sigma....) as well as a 64nn f2.8 macro with 1:1 magnification amd some light....


----------



## degos (Feb 3, 2021)

bbb34 said:


> Don't cry after outgoing technology.



If it takes choice away from the end-user then by all means cry.

People need to get out of this mindset of "oh that's what companies do, we just have to deal with it". No, companies can only exist so long as they meet the needs and desires of customers.


----------



## slclick (Feb 3, 2021)

Isn't the M series the product of the Powershot team? Might get crazy


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 3, 2021)

Andy Westwood said:


> I still believe the EOS M series has a part to play in its current form...



Yeah, that's what Gandalf said of Golem.


----------



## Maps (Feb 3, 2021)

degos said:


> If it takes choice away from the end-user then by all means cry.
> 
> People need to get out of this mindset of "oh that's what companies do, we just have to deal with it". No, companies can only exist so long as they meet the needs and desires of customers.



I want to whole-heartedly agree, and I can at least half agree… But it’s worth remembering that while the (in my opinion brilliant) M cameras were selling very well to a lot of happy customers, Canon was hemorrhaging money.


----------



## dolina (Feb 3, 2021)

Because the mount does not attract CR's core audience does not mean it isn't profitable.


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Feb 3, 2021)

Why not pivot EOS-M to video? The EF-M lenses (even the zooms) are really good quality and remarkably compact. A shift to video-centric EOS M cameras with C-log2 & C-log3 profiles, full sensor 4k recording, IBIS or built-in ND (don't think they could fit both in one camera body), and a retooled set of EF-M lenses with power zoom functionality would get a lot of attention for uses like vlogging, drone cams, travel cams, and crash cams. 

EOS R cameras and RF glass may have secured the top-shelf video performance capabilities among Canon's products, but not everybody wants or needs a 5-6 lb. camera/lens combo coupled to a massive gimbal just to get some decent B-roll. But whatever - the market will decide I guess.


----------



## zim (Feb 3, 2021)

New direction, I think they will stick a phone card into it and touch screen only back.
You heard it here FIRST!


----------



## Maps (Feb 3, 2021)

Josh Leavitt said:


> Why not pivot EOS-M to video? The EF-M lenses (even the zooms) are really good quality and remarkably compact. A shift to video-centric EOS M cameras with C-log2 & C-log3 profiles, full sensor 4k recording, IBIS or built-in ND (don't think they could fit both in one camera body), and a retooled set of EF-M lenses with power zoom functionality would get a lot of attention for uses like vlogging, drone cams, travel cams, and crash cams.
> 
> EOS R cameras and RF glass may have secured the top-shelf video performance capabilities among Canon's products, but not everybody wants or needs a 5-6 lb. camera/lens combo coupled to a massive gimbal just to get some decent B-roll. But whatever - the market will decide I guess.



That’s kind of what I hoped the M50II was going to be. I think it’s a great idea; I don’t think it’s going to happen, but I think it’s a great idea.


----------



## jvillain (Feb 3, 2021)

dolina said:


> Because the mount does not attract CR's core audience does not mean it isn't profitable.



True. But Just becuase they sell a boat load of them doesn't make them profitable ether. Looking at the patent listed they could be trying to take M a little more upscale in order to be able to fatten the margins.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Feb 3, 2021)

Interesting news, and I can't wait to see what this new direction is! 



jvillain said:


> True. But Just becuase they sell a boat load of them doesn't make them profitable ether. Looking at the patent listed they could be trying to take M a little more upscale in order to be able to fatten the margins.



If it means an M5 Mark II with a DIGIC 8 or X processor, IBIS, and Animal Eye AF, then I'm all for it!


----------



## dolina (Feb 3, 2021)

jvillain said:


> True. But Just becuase they sell a boat load of them doesn't make them profitable ether. Looking at the patent listed they could be trying to take M a little more upscale in order to be able to fatten the margins.


More to the point that Canon sees sales trend necessitating fatter margins for a future of lower volume. Economies of scale and there about.

People born in the 1960s and 1970s will bare the brunt of more expensive camera gear when they stock pile gear to be used during their retirement years.


----------



## Maps (Feb 3, 2021)

Sibir Lupus said:


> Interesting news, and I can't wait to see what this new direction is!



Famous last words.


----------



## SteveC (Feb 3, 2021)

Is it possible they're thinking of breaking the 61mm OD rule?


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Feb 3, 2021)

Maps said:


> Famous last words.



Meh!!


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Feb 3, 2021)

SteveC said:


> Is it possible they're thinking of breaking the 61mm OD rule?



Hope so! The EOS M system could do with some constant F/2.8 zoom lenses .


----------



## Danglin52 (Feb 3, 2021)

degos said:


> If it takes choice away from the end-user then by all means cry.
> 
> People need to get out of this mindset of "oh that's what companies do, we just have to deal with it". No, companies can only exist so long as they meet the needs and desires of customers.


AND, it generates profitable revenue. You have to consider all aspects of a product line - R&D, manufacturing tooling & startup, supply chain, etc. Top line sales numbers don't tell the full story without knowing contribution margin.


----------



## HAWKS61 (Feb 3, 2021)

Probably just trying to keep the interest while they sell stock they already have and will then make an announcement towards the end of the year that there will be no more M series. This is a real loss and will open the door for Sony or Fuji APSC or even Panasonic and OMD (if they do produce cameras) To position themselves as the small lightweight option for the enthusiast looking for a more compact high quality kit. There is no better than the M system at that currently just not the lens line up to support it......


----------



## Bahrd (Feb 3, 2021)

SteveC said:


> Is it possible they're thinking of breaking the 61mm OD rule?


Or of offering a rugged and sealed version (with an LCD back serving as a focus touchpad)?


----------



## esspy2 (Feb 3, 2021)

Are they going to just announce the death of EOS M?


----------



## slclick (Feb 3, 2021)

esspy2 said:


> Are they going to just announce the death of EOS M?


That would be the 'Anti-Product Launch'


----------



## canonmike (Feb 3, 2021)

jolyonralph said:


> I wouldn't replace my EOS M cameras with an R body because there simply aren't enough compact/light/inexpensive lenses available for it.
> 
> For a lightweight travel camera - if Canon ditches the EOS M then I'd probably move over to E mount.


As some CR member pointed out, in an earlier post awhile back that sounded the death knoll for the M Line, I, also would not ditch my M50. With its demise, I'd just look for one of the pre-owned, bargain priced M line bodies that would ultimately hit the market, so I would have a bargain priced back up for my light gear travel and hiking days. To those that plan on getting rid of their M line eqpt. at bargain basement prices, please post on CR, so we can scoop up some deals. We thank you in advance and it won't even bother us if you no longer like the M line for your needs. In my case, if it wasn't for the M line, I would no longer carry a camera with me when hiking, relegating me to using my cell phone, often inadequate for anything but email pics. I damaged or destroyed enough DSLR's while performing trail maintenance on the BMT. Those big bodies are just too unwieldy, including the R6 and even the RP., all of which are very difficult, even impossible to reasonably protect those heavy bodies while doing trail work. I wouldn't want anyone to think the M50 is a perfect camera. However, it's been perfect for me for what I need it to do, which is showcasing my fellow BMTA members maintenance efforts to keep the trail safe for hikers. https://photos.app.goo.gl/6L25D13YSogg7qLX9


----------



## esspy2 (Feb 3, 2021)

slclick said:


> That would be the 'Anti-Product Launch'



You know, the word "announcement" can be very ambiguous XD


----------



## slclick (Feb 3, 2021)

esspy2 said:


> You know, the word "announcement" can be very ambiguous XD


Yes and he also used the words *'product launch*'. 


besides that nonsense, if I was a current M user (I had the M5 and liked it not loved it) and Canon axed the line I would move to Fuji for a small crop. So many options there and some nice pancakes. Thinking, X-Pro 3 high end and XT30 on the low.


----------



## esspy2 (Feb 3, 2021)

slclick said:


> Yes and he also used the words *'product launch*'.
> 
> 
> besides that nonsense, if I was a current M user (I had the M5 and liked it not loved it) and Canon axed the line I would move to Fuji for a small crop. So many options there and some nice pancakes. Thinking, X-Pro 3 high end and XT30 on the low.



Oh yeah I see that now. X-E4 would be a nice small crop too.


----------



## Adrianf (Feb 3, 2021)

EOS R lenses are the future but how about an "M" size body with an "R" mount and some compact crop sensor R lenses.


----------



## MMikeHH (Feb 3, 2021)

It's none of my business, just a lowly consumer here but what Canon could do is take their 45 megapixel sensor, pair it with a Qualcomm 888 processor or two, use Android for the operating system, "focus" on some great pre- and post-processing apps and algos, and deliver something that blows the wheels off these stodgy offerings that cater to all the old-timers who comprise a tiny fraction of the market share. And call it the M7 or whatever. But make sure it uses the M mount because there is nothing worse than being stuck with equipment that has met its dead end after only 18 months of use.


----------



## esspy2 (Feb 3, 2021)

MMikeHH said:


> It's none of my business, just a lowly consumer here but what Canon could do is take their 45 megapixel sensor, pair it with a Qualcomm 888 processor or two, use Android for the operating system, "focus" on some great pre- and post-processing apps and algos, and deliver something that blows the wheels off these stodgy offerings that cater to all the old-timers who comprise a tiny fraction of the market share. And call it the M7 or whatever. But make sure it uses the M mount because there is nothing worse than being stuck with equipment that has met its dead end after only 18 months of use.


I think this would take a lot of work on Canon's end to use chips that they haven't designed. It could definitely open them up to the smartphone world that Sony seems to dominate. I think the Zeiss camera also runs on Android too. If they add the full frame 45 MP sensor into an M mount, you would have to use a speed booster to cover the full frame sensor, though. The full frame (EF) to crop sensor speed booster from Canon is retailing $599 though so I think you would have some difficulties. If they slap in that 32 MP sensor from the M6 II though, that would be pretty cool. RF lenses > EF-M lenses for sure though.


----------



## ashmadux (Feb 3, 2021)

DogpackChris said:


> M6 mk II with IBIS and I would be a happy camper!



Im just now getting to know my m62, but mannnnnnn IBIS is super essential to any mirrorless going forward. just put it on everything. It will spread the r&d costs out thoguh all the lines, making it less expensive to implement.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 3, 2021)

There are simply too many people on the planet working and teleworking from home. The M mount suits them well and Canon make a lot of moola from that group. Despite Admins love to use it as bait


jvillain said:


> True. But Just becuase they sell a boat load of them doesn't make them profitable ether. Looking at the patent listed they could be trying to take M a little more upscale in order to be able to fatten the margins.


The M system is the most profitable camera that Canon sells.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 3, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Many M users are using and purchasing third party lenses such as Sigma for their cameras. Canon will do as they did the RF mount and introduce an adapter for the M system.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 3, 2021)

The M50 or M6 + Sigma 16mm has been a hot selling vlogging setup


----------



## slclick (Feb 4, 2021)

Adrianf said:


> EOS R lenses are the future but how about an "M" size body with an "R" mount and some compact crop sensor R lenses.


That is exactly what 50% of the people who desire an R7 want out of it. The other half wish for it to continue in the 7D style. I'm in the latter camp.


----------



## Bob Howland (Feb 4, 2021)

jam05 said:


> Many M users are using and purchasing third party lenses such as Sigma for their cameras. Canon will do as they did the RF mount and introduce an adapter for the M system.


What exactly is "an adapter for the M system"? If it is an adapter for EF lenses on an M body, they have had one since the beginning of the M system. I own one. I also own two Vello adapters that look identical to the Canon adapter, except for the printing.


----------



## Bob Howland (Feb 4, 2021)

jam05 said:


> The M50 or M6 + Sigma 16mm has been a hot selling vlogging setup


The Sigma 16mm is the largest of the three Sigma 1.4 trio lenses, although It is excellent. What Canon badly needs is a smaller 15 f/2 M lens.


----------



## Bob Howland (Feb 4, 2021)

jam05 said:


> There are simply too many people on the planet working and teleworking from home. The M mount suits them well and Canon make a lot of moola from that group. Despite Admins love to use it as bait
> 
> The M system is the most profitable camera that Canon sells.


How do you know that? It may be the highest volume Canon camera but that is different than being the most profitable one.


----------



## slclick (Feb 4, 2021)

Bob Howland said:


> What exactly is "an adapter for the M system"? If it is an adapter for EF lenses on an M body, they have had one since the beginning of the M system. I own one. I also own two Vello adapters that look identical to the Canon adapter, except for the printing.


Electronics pass through for AF and possible control rings? Yeah, the post was a bit cryptic.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 4, 2021)

Bob Howland said:


> How do you know that? It may be the highest volume Canon camera but that is different than being the most profitable one.


Well we do know the Rebel DSLR was the cash cow until recently so it is logical to think the new high volume seller for Canon is similarly targeted.


----------



## peters (Feb 4, 2021)

jolyonralph said:


> I wouldn't replace my EOS M cameras with an R body because there simply aren't enough compact/light/inexpensive lenses available for it.
> 
> For a lightweight travel camera - if Canon ditches the EOS M then I'd probably move over to E mount.


I dont understand that. The EOS RP is one of the smallest and lightest fullframe cameras right now, isnt it? What benefits would you see in switching?
Also, smaller lenses are starting to come, the RF 35 is very handy and a nice focal length for travel. And the RF 50mm Pancake on any R camera is certainly a super duper tiny and light package?


----------



## snapshot (Feb 4, 2021)

peters said:


> I dont understand that. The EOS RP is one of the smallest and lightest fullframe cameras right now, isnt it? What benefits would you see in switching?
> Also, smaller lenses are starting to come, the RF 35 is very handy and a nice focal length for travel. And the RF 50mm Pancake on any R camera is certainly a super duper tiny and light package?


either way, he would have to buy into new system, not much caries from a M based kit to a R based kit. A kit full of EF glass kept me in EOS orbit. Maybe A9/7/1 whatever would have looked good if EF was dead and the EF->RF adapter didn't exist.


----------



## Aaron D (Feb 4, 2021)

I got the original M and loved it. Only kept it a while though, because I had to have a backup for my 5D at the time: has to be full frame for my work (livelihood, that is). And I can't justify three bodies because as is, the 2nd collects dust 99% of the time. Yeah, yeah--I should be more successful.

Here's what I'd like to see for the M, or most preferably a compact R series: No bump on top, but a viewfinder in rangefinder style. Like a Sony 7C or the Leica CL, only Canon excellent and Canon reasonably priced. An APS-C would be very cool, but if it's an RF mount and the same sensor as the R5, I'd buy one. Or two.


----------



## Bernie (Feb 4, 2021)

I love my M5 and EF-M lenses because I appreciate them for what they are: a compact, lightweight, low-cost camera/lens system that meets all the photography needs that don't require a large, heavy, expensive set of cameras and lenses. By buying Canon refurbished EF-M gear, I have a full range of lenses from 11 mm to 200 mm (18-320 mm FF equivalent) for about the cost of a single FF EF/RF camera/lens.

While I would love to see an M5 Mk2, I see the writing on the wall: it says the future of Canon ILC cameras is with the RF mount. I will be very surprised if Canon's upcoming EF-M announcement is an incremental update to the any of the existing bodies. I see that the EOS RP and lower-end RF lenses are almost as compact/lightweight, and almost as low cost as the EF-M family.

On the other hand, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Canon leverages the EF-M lenses into a novel new form factor and/or application that is uniquely better suited to the advantages of the EF-M lenses than to the RF lens ecosystem.


----------



## JohnOnTheNet (Feb 4, 2021)

A lot of older people, especially women would appreciate a new EF-M camera with some nice light telephoto lenses, like a 500mm f8 or longer. When your shoulders are going and you're over fifty-five every gram (or oz) counts.


----------



## jeliel (Feb 4, 2021)

Perhaps a compact FF ? Something like a M50 with Full Frame Sensor ? ... Please ...


----------



## LordVader (Feb 4, 2021)

I'm still hoping.
If they cancel the system there is nothing to rant about. But I wont replace my equipment with EOS R for many reasons. Price and weight are the most important, but beeing left standing in the rain is definetly also a point that would strongly drive me to look for another manufactor.


----------



## ZenYogiVegan (Feb 4, 2021)

I started with the M50, then upgraded to the M6II. I picked up the Sigma trio (16/30/56 F1.4) along with a few of the EF-M lenses. A few months ago I bought the R6 but kept the M6II and lenses for times when I want to travel light. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE one final upgraded M body with IBIS and better 4k video (closer in quality to the 10bit Fuji XT4) and I would be a happy camper  . I know the future is with the R mount but the M system definitely has it's place in the market I think


----------



## dilbert (Feb 4, 2021)

Adrianf said:


> EOS R lenses are the future but how about an "M" size body with an "R" mount and some compact crop sensor R lenses.



It doesn't work like that. The M series is good because it is so small and compat. That smallness and compactness applies to both camera and lens.

5D Mark IV + 16-35/f4 (1505g) weighs more than two M6 + 11-22 (610g each).


----------



## bbb34 (Feb 4, 2021)

degos said:


> If it takes choice away from the end-user then by all means cry.
> 
> People need to get out of this mindset of "oh that's what companies do, we just have to deal with it". No, companies can only exist so long as they meet the needs and desires of customers.



You can and will vote with your feet order, and so will other buyers. It's not the company that sticks to old technology that will survive.

2.5 years there was a lot of crying about the (perceived) obsolescence of the EF mount and DLSRs. Meanwhile I don't hear and see people crying anymore about that.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 4, 2021)

bbb34 said:


> You can and will vote with your feet order, and so will other buyers. It's not the company that sticks to old technology that will survive.
> 
> 2.5 years there was a lot of crying about the (perceived) obsolescence of the EF mount and DLSRs. Meanwhile I don't hear and see people crying anymore about that.


Please listen to me, I'm still crying !


----------



## vangelismm (Feb 4, 2021)

Sibir Lupus said:


> Interesting news, and I can't wait to see what this new direction is!
> 
> 
> 
> If it means an M5 Mark II with a DIGIC 8 or X processor, IBIS, and Animal Eye AF, then I'm all for it!



It is the new 50mm IS, everybody want it, except Canon. And of course, our CR ADM


----------



## peters (Feb 4, 2021)

snapshot said:


> either way, he would have to buy into new system, not much caries from a M based kit to a R based kit. A kit full of EF glass kept me in EOS orbit. Maybe A9/7/1 whatever would have looked good if EF was dead and the EF->RF adapter didn't exist.


Jeah. 
I must say that EF-R Adapter works realy excellent. You gain a bit of size and weight, but it works so far perfectly with all of my 10 lenses (canon, Sigma, Tamron and third party). It feels VERY close to native and even gives you the benefit of an internal ND filter, which is super great  
It allows the usage of SO many EF lenses, its great. The market is full of affordable, interesting and high quality glas =)


----------



## Adrianf (Feb 4, 2021)

slclick said:


> That is exactly what 50% of the people who desire an R7 want out of it. The other half wish for it to continue in the 7D style. I'm in the latter camp.


I agree. The R7 needs to be as robust as the 7D


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 4, 2021)

DogpackChris said:


> M6 mk II with IBIS and I would be a happy camper!


IBIS makes cameras bigger so I do not see it coming to EF-M.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 4, 2021)

jvillain said:


> True. But Just becuase they sell a boat load of them doesn't make them profitable ether. Looking at the patent listed they could be trying to take M a little more upscale in order to be able to fatten the margins.


M cameras are small and cheap.
A new direction leads me to believe one of those two things is changing and price makes the most sense.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 4, 2021)

jam05 said:


> The M system is the most profitable camera that Canon sells.


Not that I doubt you but how do you know that?


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 4, 2021)

DogpackChris said:


> M6 mk II with IBIS and I would be a happy camper!


If Canon introduces 1 or more RF APS Cameras surely the market and sales will decide which way EOS-M is heading. If sales fall quickly and Canon not making viable sales of the M mount cameras then they will be forced in position to stop making any more EOS M cameras and lenses.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 4, 2021)

[email protected] said:


> If Canon introduces 1 or more RF APS Cameras surely the market and sales will decide which way EOS-M is heading. If sales fall quickly and Canon not making viable sales of the M mount cameras then they will be forced in position to stop making any more EOS M cameras and lenses.


New cameras generally outsell old ones.
Besides that, I am not so sure how much they could learn from one camera anyway.


----------



## peconicgp (Feb 4, 2021)

DogpackChris said:


> M6 mk II with IBIS and I would be a happy camper!


And weather sealing! I love my M6 mk II but would really love weather sealing as I spend a lot of time outdoors and don't take the M6 MK II when there is threat of rain which is too bad.


----------



## -pekr- (Feb 4, 2021)

Canon is going to announce they are buying Nikon!


----------



## speg (Feb 4, 2021)

Nooooo. I just upgraded from M50 to Rp and I’m kinda missing the M50. sigh.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

grantmasterflash said:


> And people act like every single photographer wants to attach a 500mm lens to the front of a camera and there's no reason to use one otherwise. I for one do NOT want that. I wish I had a tiny 300mm on my M6 but I really really don't want a big camera. 99% of the photos I'll ever take in my life is within reach of a 150mm lens. An R6 with an APS-C sensor makes zero sense to me.





dolina said:


> Because the mount does not attract CR's core audience does not mean it isn't profitable.



*Because the mount does not attract CR's core audience does not mean it isn't profitable.  

THIS. *


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

speg said:


> Nooooo. I just upgraded from M50 to Rp and I’m kinda missing the M50. sigh.


...I'm interested in reading more about your upgrade.

Thanks for posting.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> M cameras are small and cheap.
> A new direction leads me to believe one of those two things is changing and price makes the most sense.



Have you seen the price of the M6 Mk II?


----------



## bdbender4 (Feb 4, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Wait and wait and wait-some-more for Canon to make an announcement about EOS-M? Gosh, that's a novel concept.

I waited from 2012 to 2019 for Canon to make some serious lenses for M besides the 22 and 11-22. Tried some other M lenses but IMHO they were not up to par. Had M5 and M6 bodies and liked them very much. I reluctantly went to another system in 2019 when it became clear that Canon was never going to take M seriously as a _system_. The terrific 32 came along, and I had one, but it was too little too late for me. 

I used some EF lenses on the adapter, but that is a kludge that completely undermined the major selling point of having a _small, compact APS-C system_. Still watching Canon APS-C but very little chance at this point of coming back. No updated M5. High prices. Never any decent package lenses, only the 15-45. Personally not interested in the Sigmas. 

If they go to the RF mount, will Canon keep the APS-C kit small, especially with some decent small APS-C lenses? Until recently most RF lenses have been large, expensive, and heavy, even for full frame. Canon, together with Nikon and Panasonic and Sony, want us to switch to full frame. Which I did in 2019. (Not to Canon, but that's off topic.)


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

canonmike said:


> As some CR member pointed out, in an earlier post awhile back that sounded the death knoll for the M Line, I, also would not ditch my M50. With its demise, I'd just look for one of the pre-owned, bargain priced M line bodies that would ultimately hit the market, so I would have a bargain priced back up for my light gear travel and hiking days. To those that plan on getting rid of their M line eqpt. at bargain basement prices, please post on CR, so we can scoop up some deals. We thank you in advance and it won't even bother us if you no longer like the M line for your needs. In my case, if it wasn't for the M line, I would no longer carry a camera with me when hiking, relegating me to using my cell phone, often inadequate for anything but email pics. I damaged or destroyed enough DSLR's while performing trail maintenance on the BMT. Those big bodies are just too unwieldy, including the R6 and even the RP., all of which are very difficult, even impossible to reasonably protect those heavy bodies while doing trail work. I wouldn't want anyone to think the M50 is a perfect camera. However, it's been perfect for me for what I need it to do, which is showcasing my fellow BMTA members maintenance efforts to keep the trail safe for hikers.



This is such a good post.

I can sort of say the same thing about family outings, trips and vacations.

Any of the Ms (even the OG)...when paired with the 11-22 or 22...in my hands (or either of my daughters' hands) has generated literally thousands of images better than 98% of the travelers I see at the same locations.

Why? Because when I'm out with my family, the primary goal is NOT to take pictures and short videos. The primary goal is to enjoy whatever we're aiming to experience...in real time.

The M format has been perfect for our family, in that its size-and-weight-and-volume...enables family fun without domination by camera gear.

Now...for hand-held wildlife images, the M ergonomics don't work well with large whites--so its back to (in my case)...the 5D Mk III (until I purchase an R5 and an adapter).

It just makes no sense for Canon to eliminate the M and its smaller sensor.

None.


----------



## slclick (Feb 4, 2021)

josephandrews222 said:


> Have you seen the price of the M6 Mk II?


$849. One persons cheap is another persons one check away from homelessness. It's ricockulous discussing these points.


----------



## Maps (Feb 4, 2021)

josephandrews222 said:


> This is such a good post.
> 
> I can sort of say the same thing about family outings, trips and vacations.
> 
> ...



I agree with most of what you’ve said, but I’d encourage you to take a quick look at the last 5 years of Canon’s financial statements to see how things were going with them while you, myself, and so many other people were buying into, enjoying, and getting great results with the M system.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

Maps said:


> I agree with most of what you’ve said, but I’d encourage you to take a quick look at the last 5 years of Canon’s financial statements to see how things were going with them while you, myself, and so many other people were buying into, enjoying, and getting great results with the M system.



...not sure I understand. I'm invested in all of what Canon has sold...for decades. And I will invest in R soon...whether or not M exists.

If it does not exist, I go elsewhere for compact gear.

Enlighten me: what, specifically, is in financial reports about EF-M (no snark Intended)?


----------



## jolyonralph (Feb 4, 2021)

peters said:


> I dont understand that. The EOS RP is one of the smallest and lightest fullframe cameras right now, isnt it? What benefits would you see in switching?
> Also, smaller lenses are starting to come, the RF 35 is very handy and a nice focal length for travel. And the RF 50mm Pancake on any R camera is certainly a super duper tiny and light package?



I don't need full frame for a travel camera. What I need is a lightweight combination of ultrawide, standard, and zoom with a prime or two thrown in.

Now, I have the EF-M 11-22, the EF-M 18-55, the EF-M 55-200 - and these lenses can fit comfortably into pockets in my coat and, most importantly, don't cost much. Add in the 22mm and the 28mm macro and I'm good for almost anything I need. Occasionally for fun I'll throw my EF 50mm f/1.2L on an adaptor to use with the M5, and that's a really fun combination (but yes, that's not cheap - but it's a lens I already own)

What would I have to get with the EOS R? The 24-105 f/4-7.1 would be the obvious starting point, but then I'd need a 70-200 f/4 (or ideally a 70-300 to try to match the reach of the 55-200 on APS-C - and that doesn't exist yet). And I'd need an ultrawide lens, and there's no affordable option there yet. But those lenses will be bulky. You can't change the laws of physics. Full frame lenses will never be as compact as the APS-C equivalents. And probably never as cheap.


The reality is that I probably wouldn't switch to RF mount if my EF-M mount cameras died - I'd probably buy used replacement cameras to keep shooting with the lenses I already own.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 4, 2021)

Maps said:


> I agree with most of what you’ve said, but I’d encourage you to take a quick look at the last 5 years of Canon’s financial statements to see how things were going with them while you, myself, and so many other people were buying into, enjoying, and getting great results with the M system.


Strange statement because if you look back through Canon's financials they have called the M50 one of their strongest selling cameras in many quarters since its release.


----------



## PiezoSwitch (Feb 4, 2021)

The EOS-M line may be coming to an end but it occupies a special place in my heart simply by virtue of its compactness and competency. Feature wise and performance wise my M6 does just enough that I have no qualms about bringing my M6 with me to most places. Results wise I still prefer the images from my full frame kit but I’ve never felt so liberated from the burden of carrying my gear. And my M6 has taken a fair proportion of my favourite images over the past 3 years simply because I have it with me as an everyday walk about camera. The relative low cost of the lenses is also favorable as it has enabled building a system with a fairly low expenditure.


----------



## speg (Feb 4, 2021)

josephandrews222 said:


> ...I'm interested in reading more about your upgrade.
> 
> Thanks for posting.



Well, I do miss the size of the M50. Not that the RP is huge or anything, but when you include the lens size.. the M series is very nice. I will miss that when out and about. Even around the house with the kids, it's a bit less intrusive. I also only have one RF lens at the moment so that doesn't help. I was hoping for some better low light performance but so far it hasn't been overly impressive. Again not bad, but just not leaps and bounds above the M50.

I still think it is the right choice though, given the future of the RF line vs the EF-M. Once I get my hands on the 70-200 I probably won't look back.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

speg said:


> Well, I do miss the size of the M50. Not that the RP is huge or anything, but when you include the lens size.. the M series is very nice. I will miss that when out and about. Even around the house with the kids, it's a bit less intrusive. I also only have one RF lens at the moment so that doesn't help. I was hoping for some better low light performance but so far it hasn't been overly impressive. Again not bad, but just not leaps and bounds above the M50.
> 
> I still think it is the right choice though, given the future of the RF line vs the EF-M. Once I get my hands on the 70-200 I probably won't look back.



There is no doubt that your R-mount gear will enable acquisition of superior images in low-light shooting. I will be making that jump soon, too!

But for my purposes there remains room for the M-mount gear as well...and I plan to continue to utilize it often. 

I do cringe a bit at your 'given the future of the RF line vs the EF-M' statement.

I am reminded of an oft-used two-word quote: your statement might just be 'Fake News' from the mainstream media!


----------



## Maps (Feb 4, 2021)

josephandrews222 said:


> ...not sure I understand. I'm invested in all of what Canon has sold...for decades. And I will invest in R soon...whether or not M exists.
> 
> If it does not exist, I go elsewhere for compact gear.
> 
> Enlighten me: what, specifically, is in financial reports about EF-M (no snark Intended)?



Thank you for the “no snark” tag.  None intended from my end either! Canon have seen their profits fall off a cliff in the iPhone era, as has every other manufacturer. I think we’re all on the same page there. The M mount has existed across that timeframe and has sold really well for Canon (and as you’ve pointed out and I totally agree with, is a great product). If a product is selling really well, but the company is losing a lot of money, it would suggest to me that the profit/margin on that product is not very high. Good for you and me, not so good for the company.

Canon have stated over the last couple years that their solution to this problem is to focus on high-end imaging, where the margins are much better. They can charge whatever they want for a high-end camera, as long as they give it sufficient specs to justify the cost. It costs more to manufacture, but not that much more than an APS-C unit, a lot of the components are the same… Looking at the latest report (which is tough to dissect because of Covid), the strategy seems to be working. They sold way fewer cameras this year than past years, but because so many of them were R5s/6s, profits improved quite a bit.

So, sort of to summarize the thinking is... let phones have the entire low-end market. There’s no need for EF-M, micro4/3, or other cheaper APS-C solutions. You and I both like them, but go outside and see what the majority of people are taking pictures with… we’re part of an increasingly small group. You just can’t sell enough of these “entry level” cameras anymore to make any kind of real profit to justify the effort. Instead, focus on expensive high-end cameras that can do the things that phones cannot do and won’t be able to do for the foreseeable future. You’ll sell a lot fewer cameras than you used to, but make a lot of money every time you do sell one.

Also, be careful of using logic from 10 years ago. Many people will immediately point out that Rebels were where Canon made most of their money... 10 years ago. Totally true in years past, but phones weren’t competitors then. This is a much different market and it requires a much different approach. I know you’re not going to like any of this… I don’t like it either. I wouldn’t even ask you to agree with me; but can you see how the line of thinking goes, even if you absolutely hate it?


----------



## Maps (Feb 4, 2021)

canonnews said:


> Strange statement because if you look back through Canon's financials they have called the M50 one of their strongest selling cameras in many quarters since its release.



Stop me if I’m wrong here, but wasn’t the wording “strong-selling” or something to that effect? I don’t remember them saying anything about “profitable”. Could be wrong? But one, one thousand, one million, or one trillion X $0 all equal $0.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 4, 2021)

It would seem that R&D spending for the M line is mostly in the past, so if they are selling well, they should be profitable. Of course, I don’t know.

I don’t want to see the line going away, even though there is not a lot of chance that I will buy one. I looked seriously at the M50 for a travel camera before my fall, 2019, month in Europe. But I decided on the G5X II instead, for even greater convenience. The 1” sensor of the G7X II had served me well in the past for prints up to 13” x 19”, and the popup viewfinder was a welcome addition for shooting out in bright sun. I could see myself owning an M series camera, but in reality, I never made a good case to myself for when I might use it. If I’m home or traveling by car, I can easily use my FF equipment. If traveling by plane or train, I would take the small travel camera. My main video project didn’t take place last summer, and I was in Denmark when the event happened in 2019. So I tend not to give much thought to video considerations.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

Maps said:


> Thank you for the “no snark” tag.  None intended from my end either! Canon have seen their profits fall off a cliff in the iPhone era, as has every other manufacturer. I think we’re all on the same page there. The M mount has existed across that timeframe and has sold really well for Canon (and as you’ve pointed out and I totally agree with, is a great product). If a product is selling really well, but the company is losing a lot of money, it would suggest to me that the profit/margin on that product is not very high. Good for you and me, not so good for the company.
> 
> Canon have stated over the last couple years that their solution to this problem is to focus on high-end imaging, where the margins are much better. They can charge whatever they want for a high-end camera, as long as they give it sufficient specs to justify the cost. It costs more to manufacture, but not that much more than an APS-C unit, a lot of the components are the same… Looking at the latest report (which is tough to dissect because of Covid), the strategy seems to be working. They sold way fewer cameras this year than past years, but because so many of them were R5s/6s, profits improved quite a bit.
> 
> ...



Absolutely I see your line of thinking.

Every year (since 1997) I build a 12 month calendar for family and friends--one image per month. This year's calendar images were all but one generated by iPhones...largely because of the pandemic.

I still think there's a place for the M mount. What phones have killed are point and shoot...an S95 has served me very very well...could go on and on.

For me, the M is essential to how I acquire images...and I will pay a premium for more advanced Ms down the road.


----------



## bbb34 (Feb 4, 2021)

Canon leaked images for the press release again. Here are the EOS RM10 and the EOS RM50


----------



## slclick (Feb 4, 2021)

josephandrews222 said:


> Absolutely I see your line of thinking.
> 
> Every year (since 1997) I build a 12 month calendar for family and friends--one image per month. This year's calendar images were all but one generated by iPhones...largely because of the pandemic.
> 
> ...


Funny you say that because for me, the jump from an iPhone 8 to a 12 has killed my need to have anything other than my FF gear. And if I do get another camera besides my Canon ILC's? It will be a point and shoot, like an X100V. Reasoning? Like the poster said earlier about being in the moment whilst on holiday and such and not using bulky gear, having a fixed lens camera is even quicker and simpler.
Go figure, right? Different strokes, yadda yadda...


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

bbb34 said:


> Canon leaked images for the press release again. Here are the EOS RM10 and the EOS RM50
> 
> View attachment 195663


 I googled RM10.

This came up:









List of unproven methods against COVID-19 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

slclick said:


> Funny you say that because for me, the jump from an iPhone 8 to a 12 has killed my need to have anything other than my FF gear. And if I do get another camera besides my Canon ILC's? It will be a point and shoot, like an X100V. Reasoning? Like the poster said earlier about being in the moment whilst on holiday and such and not using bulky gear, having a fixed lens camera is even quicker and simpler.
> Go figure, right? Different strokes, yadda yadda...



It is amazing how much M gear you can get in a small backpack. Amazing. And the tripod is way way smaller.

I use my 6s for photography purposes a lot.

...I've 'borrowed' my daughter's 12. It is better. The ultra-wide is pretty good.

But nothing like an APS-C sized sensor. And nothing like the precise controls that the M6 Mark II offers.

Nothing.

I much appreciate your use case...for me the M 22mm mated to any M but especially the M2/M10/M200-sized bodies works well for what you describe...and does fit in my pocket. All for maybe not pennies on the dollar...but certainly dimes.

But you're right...the modern P&S cameras are better...as I described up-thread...a Canon S95 served us very, very, very well.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

slclick said:


> Funny you say that because for me, the jump from an iPhone 8 to a 12 has killed my need to have anything other than my FF gear. And if I do get another camera besides my Canon ILC's? It will be a point and shoot, like an X100V. Reasoning? Like the poster said earlier about being in the moment whilst on holiday and such and not using bulky gear, having a fixed lens camera is even quicker and simpler.
> Go figure, right? Different strokes, yadda yadda...



CR, I think, has seen one of these previously.

The best camera/lens combination is what's in your hands.

In Dec 2017 visited the Dolphin hotel at WDW.

...packed my M6 and three lenses: 22, 11-22 and 18-150.

Needed to run back to our room and switch to the 18-150 when youngest daughter spotted what looked like an eagle on the right-side dolphin.




Sure enough...




...and finally:




...not as dramatic as the baldies fishing and diving and capturing on the Mississippi River...in fact, this eagle has a much much larger fish to carry!

I certainly wish I had more lens for the last shot...but the EF-M 18-150 was as much focal length as I had packed...and it, when mated to the M6...was 'good enough' for our purposes: not to sell, but to share with family and friends.

I have no illusions about my own skill level and am quite certain that some of the pros who post here could have done better. Indeed, I learn some by reading posts here.

But the flexibility offered by Canon's M format really is amazing.

Thanks for reading!


----------



## slclick (Feb 4, 2021)

josephandrews222 said:


> It is amazing how much M gear you can get in a small backpack. Amazing. And the tripod is way way smaller.
> 
> I use my 6s for photography purposes a lot.
> 
> ...


Two things...you mentioned the S95. We had one as well (Neuro loved his too) The other thing is my M5, while I thought it was laid out far more intelligently than other small crops in terms of dials and customization, it's Powershot menu system was a turd.They mos def had the wrong team working on the M's. All I ever thought about was when will they make an M5ll. I have to have a viewfinder so the M6ll never appealed to me. I did LOVE the 22 on the M5, I could use it like a point and shoot. At the time, there was only about 5-6 lenses so it was easy to let it all go.

image:Waimea Canyon, Christmas Day M5, EF-M 22


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 4, 2021)

slclick said:


> Funny you say that because for me, the jump from an iPhone 8 to a 12 has killed my need to have anything other than my FF gear. And if I do get another camera besides my Canon ILC's? It will be a point and shoot, like an X100V. Reasoning? Like the poster said earlier about being in the moment whilst on holiday and such and not using bulky gear, having a fixed lens camera is even quicker and simpler.
> Go figure, right? Different strokes, yadda yadda...











Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max Camera review: Big and beautiful - DXOMARK


Announced last month as the top device in the iPhone 12 family, the iPhone 12 Pro Max features the largest screen and the most impressively specified main camera of Apple’s new batch of phones. The main wide camera has a 26 mm-equivalent f/1.6 lens in front of a 12 MP sensor with 1.7µ photo...




www.dxomark.com





...from the link:

_Key camera specifications:_

Primary: 12 MP sensor (1.7µ photo sites), 26 mm-equivalent f/1.6-aperture lens, sensor shift OIS, PDAF
Ultra-wide: 12 MP 1/3.6″ sensor, 13 mm-equivalent (14 mm measured) f/2.4-aperture lens
Tele: 12 MP 1/3.4″ sensor, 65 mm-equivalent f/2.2-aperture lens, PDAF, OIS
XXXXX

My trusty S95 packs a 1/1.7" sensor...and a 28-105 equivalent lens (but f4.9 at the long end).

I very much look forward to a bit more zoom in Apple's tele...larger sensor size is probably too much to ask.

Perhaps an iPhone 13 is in my future...

I can think of two sets of use cases where the S95 was fantastic.

*(1)* Eldest daughter graduated from a decent school in England in 2010...we traveled there and to France (my first time) for her graduation.

At the time we visited Paris for a few days, there were warnings GALORE about pickpockets.

Like Bob Seger sang, I'm just a 'midwest boy all his own' and (a) didn't want to risk losing money and more; and 

(b) wanted to enjoy the sights. So it was one camera in Paris: the S95. My wife and daughters appreciated that.

So 100% of the few hundred images we acquired (daughters had the Powershot 300 cameras...even tinier than the S95 but a tad smaller sensor) were with the S95.

Even now I marvel at the images and image quality...had books made and printed at what is now Printique (adoramapix, I think).

Now oldest daughter sends occasional iPhone 11 pix my way--shockingly good.

Youngest daughter has a 12...

*(2) *What I really like(d) about the S95 is the way exposure compensation is modified--hell I don't know the name of the dial but it is a little knurled dial in the lower right of the back of the camera. This is REALLY useful when shooting concert pictures. Of course no viewfinder but it 'just works' when holding the camera a foot or so from ones eyes and _quickly _changing EC when lighting changes. And don't forget: the S95 is TRULY pocket-sized (think concert security).

So rock concerts are a nice use case for an S95.

But now that I think about it...my iPhone 6s worked well when standing close (but not next) to the stage for a Janelle Monae concert.

So what do I know!







iPhone 6s sensor size: 1/3"

Thanks for reading.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 4, 2021)

Maps said:


> If a product is selling really well, but the company is losing a lot of money,


Canon is not losing money.
Their revenue tanked because they are selling significantly fewer point & shoot and DSLR cameras.
Canon had one money-losing quarter during the pandemic but so did pretty much the entire world,


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 5, 2021)

josephandrews222 said:


> What phones have killed are point and shoot.


The era of the point and shoot is gone but G5X, G7X, and ZV-1 sell pretty well.


----------



## Maps (Feb 5, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Canon is not losing money.
> Their revenue tanked because they are selling significantly fewer point & shoot and DSLR cameras.
> Canon had one money-losing quarter during the pandemic but so did pretty much the entire world,



You’re absolutely right. Poor choice of words on my part. I meant that their revenue was declining, not that they were operating at a loss.


----------



## canonmike (Feb 5, 2021)

PiezoSwitch said:


> The EOS-M line may be coming to an end but it occupies a special place in my heart simply by virtue of its compactness and competency. Feature wise and performance wise my M6 does just enough that I have no qualms about bringing my M6 with me to most places. Results wise I still prefer the images from my full frame kit but I’ve never felt so liberated from the burden of carrying my gear. And my M6 has taken a fair proportion of my favourite images over the past 3 years simply because I have it with me as an everyday walk about camera. The relative low cost of the lenses is also favorable as it has enabled building a system with a fairly low expenditure.


Two very good points, perfectly expressed.


----------



## John Wilde (Feb 5, 2021)

The M50 is Canon's best selling mirrorless camera, both in the USA and in Japan. As long as people keep buying it, Canon will keep making it.

If Canon wanted M to go in a new direction, they could make a video-centric model to challenge Panasonic M43 video.


----------



## grantmasterflash (Feb 5, 2021)

DogpackChris said:


> M6 mk II with IBIS and I would be a happy camper!



With real 4k and I'm with you. Oh, maybe a higher res optional EVF. Now I'm with you. And a fast 15mm lens that isn't a tank. And a longer zoom. Now I'm in.


----------



## grantmasterflash (Feb 5, 2021)

I think Canon has gone back and forth with the M system. At first they just wanted in the Mirrorless game without cannibalizing their cash cow - the DSLR. Later when the writing was on the wall they realized they'd have to bring out the EF equivalent mirrorless and have an advantage over Sony's tiny mount so they came out with the RF. Now they have a problem, the bean counters don't like that Canon is developing more than one type of sensor and they have to create two types of lenses. However, at the end of the day so does everyone else. Sony makes APS-C lenses for the E-Mount and smaller sensors for the 6x00 series. Just because they have the same mount doesn't mean all of the lenses are the same. The Sony way looks better on paper because in our minds (and Sony marketing department) you can take your lenses with you when you upgrade from the 6x00 to the A7x or A9x but not if you bought APS-C lenses! If you did you're in the same boat as going from EF-M to RF (yes, I know you can shoot at 10 or 12mp on a Sony FF with an APS-C lens, but who does that?).

The difference is that RF is good at being a serious large camera. EF-M is good at being a smaller, lighter ameteur camera. The E mount is good at the latter and mediocre at the former. Canon could capitalize on this if they keep their heads on straight.

We don't really need "L" glass on EF-M, that's not what it's for. Having reasonably fast clear lenses like the 30mm f/1.4 serves our purpose. Give us a fast 15mm, a fast 50mm and a fast 85mm that are still small and light. Also give us a "faster" short zoom 15-45 and a longer zoom 100-300 and it would probably cover just about anything we'd ever do with an EF-M camera. As for cameras, an M5 Mkii would take care of us until the mkiii's came out which would include clog and real 4k. Beyond that, I don't care.

Oh, one more thing. Canon should include a trade-in program for anyone going from EF-M to RF for good will and to keep people in the family. I think there's room for an M200, M50, M6 and M5 for a long time as long as we have lenses. The EF-M market will never be served well by RF. It would be wise of Canon to realize this and continue to serve the EF-M market with EF-M cameras.


----------



## idahobill (Feb 5, 2021)

There is a serious size and weight difference between the m50 with native lens and even the canon RP with native lens. Many want small cameras for travel or they will just use their iPhones - and travel is when many people use their cameras the most and why they buy new cameras in the first place.
For 95% of people, the image quality difference between the canon rp and canon m is negligible. I’ve shot wildlife in Yellowstone with an M50 with L glass and I was shocked at the ease of use and quality. I’m not going back to my DSLRs now and I’m not buying a large camera again. 
When I can travel again, it will be with an iPhone and a small camera setup. Hopefully a real upgraded m series camera with EVF, like the M50 mk2 should have been. But I’m not bringing a 90d or an R6 or an RP - those are too big for me and I suspect many people.


----------



## HMC11 (Feb 5, 2021)

Maps said:


> Canon have stated over the last couple years that their solution to this problem is to focus on high-end imaging, where the margins are much better. They can charge whatever they want for a high-end camera, as long as they give it sufficient specs to justify the cost. It costs more to manufacture, but not that much more than an APS-C unit, a lot of the components are the same… Looking at the latest report (which is tough to dissect because of Covid), the strategy seems to be working. They sold way fewer cameras this year than past years, but because so many of them were R5s/6s, profits improved quite a bit.
> 
> So, sort of to summarize the thinking is... let phones have the entire low-end market. There’s no need for EF-M, micro4/3, or other cheaper APS-C solutions. You and I both like them, but go outside and see what the majority of people are taking pictures with… we’re part of an increasingly small group. You just can’t sell enough of these “entry level” cameras anymore to make any kind of real profit to justify the effort. Instead, focus on expensive high-end cameras that can do the things that phones cannot do and won’t be able to do for the foreseeable future. You’ll sell a lot fewer cameras than you used to, but make a lot of money every time you do sell one.


That sounds entirely reasonable and logical assuming indeed that the current development trajectory of phone cameras would not be challenging the high-end market. However, the possibility of a combination of good sensors for phones and highly capable deep-learning software in the near future could well mean that, while images from phone cameras would be of lower quality compared to high-end cameras, the AI software could make up for that (eg. creating bokeh effects, denoising automatically, highly pleasing colour science, automated enhancement of dynamic range etc) and produce competitive images. As such, although I truly enjoy using a full frame camera, I can imagine switching to using a phone as I grow older and more frail if my objective is to only get excellent images. Having said this, I also realise that a large part of my enjoyment in using a 'proper' camera is the learning process that goes with it, the physics of the lens design, the techniques that can improve the image, post-processing, and perhaps most importantly, being able to constantly learn others' technique all contributed to the enjoyable experience (yes, it can be frustrating, especially at the start, but it gets better and the experience is all the most valuable because of the struggle). In short, the joy of eventually getting it right for the intended shot. Should there be an AI phone camera that can produce the images without the learning curve, I am not sure that photography would continue to be enjoyable, for me at least.


----------



## Skux (Feb 5, 2021)

32mp sensor
IBIS
dual card slots
animal & bird eye AF
LP-E17 batteries
5 million dot EVF
Digic-X oversampled 4k

LETS GOOOOOOOOOOO


----------



## ZenYogiVegan (Feb 5, 2021)

Skux said:


> 32mp sensor
> IBIS
> dual card slots
> LP-E17 batteries
> ...


hey Canon make the new M camera with the above specs and then shut up and take my money!


----------



## koenkooi (Feb 5, 2021)

Skux said:


> 32mp sensor
> IBIS
> dual card slots
> LP-E17 batteries
> ...



An M6II with a Digic X instead of Digic 8 and a CF-E type A slot would be a massive improvement for my use already. But what I want the most is a small, M1 or M200 sized model with eye-AF in servo mode. Looking at previous releases Canon would wait for the M400 to put that in :/


----------



## Bob Howland (Feb 5, 2021)

Skux said:


> 32mp sensor
> IBIS
> dual card slots
> LP-E17 batteries
> ...


Keep it small and make versions with both M and RF mounts.


----------



## slclick (Feb 5, 2021)

You won't get dual slots in an M. Nor will you get a better evf in the M than the R series. Might not ever get any new M's. CR1 after all. 
But keep on hoping! Keep M alive!


----------



## Maps (Feb 5, 2021)

ZenYogiVegan said:


> I started with the M50, then upgraded to the M6II. I picked up the Sigma trio (16/30/56 F1.4) along with a few of the EF-M lenses. A few months ago I bought the R6 but kept the M6II and lenses for times when I want to travel light. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE one final upgraded M body with IBIS and better 4k video (closer in quality to the 10bit Fuji XT4) and I would be a happy camper  . I know the future is with the R mount but the M system definitely has it's place in the market I think



If you have a second, I’d really like to hear your thoughts (or anyone else in the same boat) on going M50 -> M6II -> R6. I know the specs, I’m more interested in your observations. Where was the biggest gain in image quality? To your eye, how big a difference is there between the three in 1080p? 4k? Obviously the 4k crop/AF loom large for the M50 here, but if we disregard those, did you find the actual IQ much improved on the M6II?

Was there a huge jump in any aspect that really stood out to you among these three cameras? If you could do it over again, would you have bothered with the M6II? Or the M50 for that matter? Hypothetically, what would a potential M mount flagship need to have looked like to have kept you from moving to the R mount? Or did you just need FF no matter what?


----------



## Maps (Feb 5, 2021)

HMC11 said:


> That sounds entirely reasonable and logical assuming indeed that the current development trajectory of phone cameras would not be challenging the high-end market. However, the possibility of a combination of good sensors for phones and highly capable deep-learning software in the near future could well mean that, while images from phone cameras would be of lower quality compared to high-end cameras, the AI software could make up for that (eg. creating bokeh effects, denoising automatically, highly pleasing colour science, automated enhancement of dynamic range etc) and produce competitive images. As such, although I truly enjoy using a full frame camera, I can imagine switching to using a phone as I grow older and more frail if my objective is to only get excellent images. Having said this, I also realise that a large part of my enjoyment in using a 'proper' camera is the learning process that goes with it, the physics of the lens design, the techniques that can improve the image, post-processing, and perhaps most importantly, being able to constantly learn others' technique all contributed to the enjoyable experience (yes, it can be frustrating, especially at the start, but it gets better and the experience is all the most valuable because of the struggle). In short, the joy of eventually getting it right for the intended shot. Should there be an AI phone camera that can produce the images without the learning curve, I am not sure that photography would continue to be enjoyable, for me at least.



For sure. My number one complaint about computational photography is that it is just so terribly boring. It at least seems like Canon are confident that FF is safe from incursion for the foreseeable future. They certainly seem to be investing to that effect. I assume (or hope) that decision is based on solid evidence.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 5, 2021)

Maps said:


> Stop me if I’m wrong here, but wasn’t the wording “strong-selling” or something to that effect? I don’t remember them saying anything about “profitable”. Could be wrong? But one, one thousand, one million, or one trillion X $0 all equal $0.


Everything has a profit margin, or it's simply not made. the idea that it' has $0 is disingenuous.

if they don't increase mount market share, then they may win the battle but they will most certainly lose the war.
chasing higher and higher margins on more expensive gear will simply destroy the industry faster, and will most certainly destroy their imaging system sales over time.

Sony has been interesting, careful, in stating that they tweak a product mix. Meaning that they still feel a spot for lower margin, but there's a mix there that has to happen.

The idea that Canon could / would dump all lower cost / lower margin items to chase higher margins, would literally be a "Canon is D00MED" moment. D**med is a banned word? Really? People thinking that chasing higher margin profits is a good thing, it's not, it's actually quite alarming.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 5, 2021)

grantmasterflash said:


> I think Canon has gone back and forth with the M system. At first they just wanted in the Mirrorless game without cannibalizing their cash cow - the DSLR. Later when the writing was on the wall they realized they'd have to bring out the EF equivalent mirrorless and have an advantage over Sony's tiny mount so they came out with the RF. Now they have a problem, the bean counters don't like that Canon is developing more than one type of sensor and they have to create two types of lenses.



This is all fiction though. Canon never has had a problem selling specific cameras to narrow markets, and they certainly had no qalms about selling the EF-M and EF-S cameras to the same markets and let the consumers decide.


----------



## Maps (Feb 5, 2021)

canonnews said:


> Everything has a profit margin, or it's simply not made. the idea that it' has $0 is disingenuous.



True. Didn’t think anyone was going to take that literally. It’s certainly not zero. I don’t think it’s very far off though.



canonnews said:


> People thinking that chasing higher margin profits is a good thing, it's not, it's actually quite alarming.



For sure. I wouldn't say I like it. I just think it’s what’s happening. Take a look at any of their guidance from the past few years. For instance, from the latest we have...

“We [Canon] will work to further strengthen our lineup of EOS R cameras and RF lenses to facilitate our aim of expanding our market share among professional and advanced amateur users where demand is solid."


----------



## TAF (Feb 5, 2021)

Aaron D said:


> Here's what I'd like to see for the M, or most preferably a compact R series: No bump on top, but a viewfinder in rangefinder style. Like a Sony 7C or the Leica CL, only Canon excellent and Canon reasonably priced. An APS-C would be very cool, but if it's an RF mount and the same sensor as the R5, I'd buy one. Or two.



I believe that something like this exists in prototype form, because I saw something that looked a lot like what you describe in the wild a couple of years ago.

It was just in passing (the fellow with it was walking the other way and I was with the family so I couldn't turn around and ask).

And yes, I would be interested as well...


----------



## TAF (Feb 5, 2021)

Josh Leavitt said:


> and a retooled set of EF-M lenses with power zoom functionality would get a lot of attention for uses like vlogging, drone cams, travel cams, and crash cams.



This. With the FAA making the maximum weight of an unregistered drone 250g (essentially making you register most anything that can fly outdoors), there is no reason not to go somewhat larger (the price increase is more linear than exponential) and put a real camera on your drone. The M would be perfect.

Since Sony has decided to get into the drone market, perhaps Canon will as well?


----------



## TAF (Feb 5, 2021)

Sibir Lupus said:


> If it means an M5 Mark II with a DIGIC 8 or X processor, IBIS, and Animal Eye AF, then I'm all for it!



How about this:

Take the R6 sensor and trim it to APS-C for the really large photosites

So 12.5mp (did I do that math right?) with the DigicX and all the firmware of the R6.

Call it the M6LL (low light)

Perfect discrete walkabout camera/surveillance camera.


----------



## Ioan (Feb 5, 2021)

I hope it will come to fruition. I am too a canon EOS M enthusiast, I was waiting for this moment, because I want to upgrade with the newest model. 
It's a very good camera, for the quality/price it is hard to beat.


----------



## SteveC (Feb 5, 2021)

TAF said:


> So 12.5mp (did I do that math right?) with the DigicX and all the firmware of the R6.



You didn't. you have to divide by (1.6 x 1.6) or 2.56 which, starting with 20mp leaves you with 7.8+ MP. (If 20 MP isn't right for the R6, please disregard.)


----------



## grantmasterflash (Feb 5, 2021)

TAF said:


> How about this:
> 
> Take the R6 sensor and trim it to APS-C for the really large photosites
> 
> ...



There's no reason for that. I think the APS-C sensors are beyond the R6 sensor if you were to crop it to APS-C size. For instance the m6 mk II sensor would be about 100mp if you scaled it up. The new Digic X however would be great.


----------



## HMC11 (Feb 6, 2021)

TAF said:


> So 12.5mp (did I do that math right?) with the DigicX and all the firmware of the R6.


Actually, it would only be about 7.8mp, but the direction of thinking is interesting 

Edit: Apologies, just noted that someone had already pointed this out.


----------



## HMC11 (Feb 6, 2021)

canonnews said:


> The idea that Canon could / would dump all lower cost / lower margin items to chase higher margins, would literally be a "Canon is D00MED" moment. D**med is a banned word? Really? People thinking that chasing higher margin profits is a good thing, it's not, it's actually quite alarming.


Indeed, if that was the strategy. The assumption about always striving to make a profit is more than likely a very sound one. As to how they do this is another matter. It could, for instance, be that despite the low margin in the M line, Canon continues to sustain it because (a) it brings new photographers into the canon brand via a relatively inexpensive pathway; and (b) by selling tons of M line gear, there could be a higher chance of those who bought into M continuing with Canon when they move into the FF space. We can never be sure, but I reckon that keeping the M line alive for the foreseeable future might make sense for these reasons alone unless, of course, they are able to replicate the M line through the RF-APSC or some such. If they completely abandon the M line, then it would be interesting to understand their thinking.


----------



## Czardoom (Feb 6, 2021)

As others have pointed out, Canon (as well as other camera makers) are focusing on higher end products. As is often the case, people take a simple statement and push it to the limits. Focusing on high end does not mean abandoning the lower end. The low end (at last count) was still selling considerably more than the high end. But as we've seen, the low end (Rebels and the M series cameras and lenses) have not gotten new lenses or many newer features. So, not much focus, but still being made and selling.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Feb 6, 2021)

Skux said:


> 32mp sensor
> IBIS
> dual card slots
> animal & bird eye AF
> ...



I would say only the dual card slot is unrealistic, most of the rest can happen.


----------



## JohnC (Feb 6, 2021)

The very high volume products in most companies goes a long way toward paying the bills and making sure everyone keeps a job even during lean times when higher end products may not sell quite as well. They may not generate enormous profits in and of themselves but they are important for this as well as other things (gateway products, innovation test beds, useful life extension for out-dated tech, etc.). 

Personally the M series didn't do much for me until the M6 II, and I tried them twice before (M, and M3). They may very well be winding it down as some rumors indicate but at least in my opinion that doesn't really seem to be the trajectory they were taking. The M6II was quite a leap in M series tech by all accounts, and many including myself would love to see that same tech in an M5 (I have the EVF attached permanently as is). If they are, I can't imagine the role of the bread and butter high volume seller wouldn't be replaced by something else, and that something else would need to fulfill the same market demands that make the current series so popular with the general public. I THINK that is the size/performance/cost relationship but perhaps there is something to it I do not understand. 

Canon made a significant stride with the R5 release, as well as the RF series in general. In fact all of the MILC/DR...blah blah arguments have died away entirely based on my personal observation. I would speculate that a lot of that technology will trickle down to lesser models in the R line, but potentially into whatever the M line is to become as well. Technology changes fast, but companies need an outlet to get useful life out of existing tech that cost millions to develop. I don't think the potential outlet the M series provides is going away entirely. Change? Almost certainly.

Caveat: The one fly in the ointment is the lack of development in the series of lenses which puzzle me. A case could be made that it is to incentivize transfer to higher end products but it still strikes me as being a little off.


----------



## Pape (Feb 6, 2021)

10mp global shutter full frame sensor
Quad pixel autofocus ,not to improve focus speed . Just to keep it same what double more megapixel sensors
Focus on f22 so f11 lenses with x2 autofocus
ibis , prolly electronical with global shutter
30fp/s. can shoot faster when making pixel shift.
Smaller than M50
no buttons. touching and squeezing areas
500$


----------



## SteveC (Feb 6, 2021)

JohnC said:


> Caveat: The one fly in the ointment is the lack of development in the series of lenses which puzzle me. A case could be made that it is to incentivize transfer to higher end products but it still strikes me as being a little off.



Canon has imposed on itself (for marketing reasons apparently) a 61 mm outside diameter rule with respect to EF-M lenses.

Given this...what lenses could they possibly develop that wouldn't just be a minor variation of what has already been developed? The 28mm was too little different from the 22 and 32 as it is to justify me buying it (I'm not going to do macro with it anyway).

(The real answer is for them to ditch the dang rule, of course.)


----------



## Czardoom (Feb 6, 2021)

JohnC said:


> The very high volume products in most companies goes a long way toward paying the bills and making sure everyone keeps a job even during lean times when higher end products may not sell quite as well. They may not generate enormous profits in and of themselves but they are important for this as well as other things (gateway products, innovation test beds, useful life extension for out-dated tech, etc.).
> 
> Personally the M series didn't do much for me until the M6 II, and I tried them twice before (M, and M3). They may very well be winding it down as some rumors indicate but at least in my opinion that doesn't really seem to be the trajectory they were taking. The M6II was quite a leap in M series tech by all accounts, and many including myself would love to see that same tech in an M5 (I have the EVF attached permanently as is). If they are, I can't imagine the role of the bread and butter high volume seller wouldn't be replaced by something else, and that something else would need to fulfill the same market demands that make the current series so popular with the general public. I THINK that is the size/performance/cost relationship but perhaps there is something to it I do not understand.
> 
> ...



The lack of lens development shouldn't be puzzling when one considers the target market. The M series (it seems to me) is clearly targeting those consumers that want the smallest camera and kit - while still utilizing a "real" camera sensor with interchangeable lenses. The market would be focused on those traveling or using the camera for casual use such as family outings and get-togethers. For that market (of which I was one, by the way) all you need is 2 or 3 lenses - a wide angle, a standard or all-in-one zoom and a telephoto. Canon offers all three, and their wide angle lens is especially noteworthy. I used the 18-150 almost exclusively and it gave me a great small and light kit. I never had any reason to buy another lens. I think Canon's market research has supplied them with the information that they need to formulate their plans.

That being said, the market is evolving and Canon's plans may be as well. And again, their market research (which they no doubt spend much money on) will help inform them as to which direction they will go with the M series. If, ultimately they can make R series cameras and lenses that are as affordable and small and light enough to replace the M series, they might do that. Or, perhaps they will go higher end with the M series and introduce more cameras and lenses. I doubt very much that Canon even knows the direction they will take. Only time - and sales - and market research - will give them that answer. it is too early in the transition to mirrorless to know what the consumers will ultimately decide.


----------



## RogerF (Feb 6, 2021)

Maybe when they say "pivot to a new direction" it means the M series would be a interchangeable lens camera with the integrated screen and selfie stick / gimbal -looking patent shown earlier.


----------



## ZenYogiVegan (Feb 6, 2021)

Maps said:


> If you have a second, I’d really like to hear your thoughts (or anyone else in the same boat) on going M50 -> M6II -> R6. I know the specs, I’m more interested in your observations. Where was the biggest gain in image quality? To your eye, how big a difference is there between the three in 1080p? 4k? Obviously the 4k crop/AF loom large for the M50 here, but if we disregard those, did you find the actual IQ much improved on the M6II?
> 
> Was there a huge jump in any aspect that really stood out to you among these three cameras? If you could do it over again, would you have bothered with the M6II? Or the M50 for that matter? Hypothetically, what would a potential M mount flagship need to have looked like to have kept you from moving to the R mount? Or did you just need FF no matter what?


To be honest I didn't really need to upgrade to the R6, I was very happy with the M6II except for the soft 4k compared to other cameras like the Fuji xt4 and Sony A6600 but had some cash spare so I thought I'd splurge and go FF and get into the RF mount system. I got sick of waiting for a high-end M camera update (like an M5 Mark II) and thought I'd sell the M6II and buy the R6 to get into the RF system, but now i'm going to keep it as well for when I want to go light. I also have 5 ef-m lenses so i'm hoping Canon will come out with at least one more M camera with IBIS and true 4k. IF the 4k video was better I may not have wanted to go to the R6 to be honest, but i'm glad I did because there's a noticeable improvement in both photos and videos


----------



## Maps (Feb 6, 2021)

ZenYogiVegan said:


> To be honest I didn't really need to upgrade to the R6, I was very happy with the M6II except for the soft 4k compared to other cameras like the Fuji xt4 and Sony A6600 but had some cash spare so I thought I'd splurge and go FF and get into the RF mount system. I got sick of waiting for a high-end M camera update (like an M5 Mark II) and thought I'd sell the M6II and buy the R6 to get into the RF system, but now i'm going to keep it as well for when I want to go light. I also have 5 ef-m lenses so i'm hoping Canon will come out with at least one more M camera with IBIS and true 4k. IF the 4k video was better I may not have wanted to go to the R6 to be honest, but i'm glad I did because there's a noticeable improvement in both photos and videos



Thanks for sharing. What I’m kind of curious about is if you could go back to your time with the M50 and somehow know that in the future you were going to wind up with the R6 (which of course didn’t exist yet), would you have bothered with the M6II “stop”? Are you happy you have the extra IQ from the M6II today or would you have been just as happy with the M50 as your travel cam? Again, this all being in the context of knowing that you have the RF camera when IQ is the priority.


----------



## ZenYogiVegan (Feb 6, 2021)

Maps said:


> Thanks for sharing. What I’m kind of curious about is if you could go back to your time with the M50 and somehow know that in the future you were going to wind up with the R6 (which of course didn’t exist yet), would you have bothered with the M6II “stop”? Are you happy you have the extra IQ from the M6II today or would you have been just as happy with the M50 as your travel cam? Again, this all being in the context of knowing that you have the RF camera when IQ is the priority.


The M50 was fine for most of what I needed but for video the 4k is virtually unusable as there's no DPAF in this mode. I wanted to have decent 4k video as well as solid photo capabilities for my youtube channel and also keep the lenses i'd already bought instead of changing systems (i was tempted to switch to Fuji xt4 but the autofocus issues stopped me). I wasn't really planning on going to FF but got sick of waiting for a better 4k M body, and it's pretty obvious most of Canon's focus will now be mirrorless RF system so i thought it was a good time to jump in. To be honest though I could've made do with the M50 all along, but you know I have a bad case of Gear Acquisition Syndrome


----------



## Chris_Seattle (Feb 7, 2021)

An M5 Markii with IBIS is the one thing that would extend the life of the M system. Between sigma and canon, they already have some decent little primes and it just doesn’t make sense to hang a giant telephoto off that little guy anyway...you would just get an older DLSR or move to the R mount for the ergonomics. M mount appeal was always size and portability, but I do like having an EVF that isn’t screw on, so I got the M50 and kept waiting, waiting...

I finally just gave up, sold my M50, and bought a Fuji XT-4. Still using Canon 5DMk4 for full frame and 7DMARKII for wildlife. At some point when I have the money, I’ll just consolidate the 7D and 5D into the R5.


----------



## slclick (Feb 7, 2021)

Chris_Seattle said:


> An M5 Markii with IBIS is the one thing that would extend the life of the M system. Between sigma and canon, they already have some decent little primes and it just doesn’t make sense to hang a giant telephoto off that little guy anyway...you would just get an older DLSR or move to the R mount for the ergonomics. M mount appeal was always size and portability, but I do like having an EVF that isn’t screw on, so I got the M50 and kept waiting, waiting...
> 
> I finally just gave up, sold my M50, and bought a Fuji XT-4. Still using Canon 5DMk4 for full frame and 7DMARKII for wildlife. At some point when I have the money, I’ll just consolidate the 7D and 5D into the R5.


Love to hear your thoughts on what you gained and what you miss. I have had a Fuji hankering but can never decide which so I don't commit. The X-Pro3 and the X100V both appeal to me for different reasons.


----------



## gmrza (Feb 8, 2021)

Czardoom said:


> As others have pointed out, Canon (as well as other camera makers) are focusing on higher end products. As is often the case, people take a simple statement and push it to the limits. Focusing on high end does not mean abandoning the lower end. The low end (at last count) was still selling considerably more than the high end. But as we've seen, the low end (Rebels and the M series cameras and lenses) have not gotten new lenses or many newer features. So, not much focus, but still being made and selling.



I had been holding out for EOS M. To date, it seems to have been focused on the lower end, with few options of good lenses being the biggest problem. My hope had been that EOS M would become a good option as a lightweight travel ILC system. In the end, my wife and I gave up, and decided to move to the Fuji X system for our travel needs, knowing that some aspects of the X system, like flash units, are more limited. So far we have not been disappointed. What I have not tried yet is an EF to X system lens adaptor.


----------



## tomsop (Feb 9, 2021)

I am very cynical about this rumor - why buy existing stock of M products if no future - can someone be buying time and quieting the rumors to help move product? The problem with the rumor is it lacks details and has the functional effect of potentially giving false hope.


----------



## Pape (Feb 9, 2021)

Only reason release more M cameras is Rebel R isnt yet ready. need more test or something. No easy to make totally new tech work like global shutter and electronic ibis.


----------



## SnowMiku (Feb 9, 2021)

I think for the M system they should keep at least 2 cameras, one entry level without the EVF at the M50 level, and one mid-range with the EVF at M6 MkII level, the M system is ideal for portability and smaller lenses only possible on the M system.

For the RF system they can have the same mid-range features and sensor as the mid-range M model, but with the RF mount, bigger size, improved ergonomics and bigger battery.


----------



## Rocky (Feb 9, 2021)

It sounds like the M is a funny position. on one hand a lot of people likes it but hope for more and better lens. On the other hand, a lot of people feel that the M is "old", does not have enough range of lens or "good" lens, and no path to upgrade to RF.
For me the M is a good travelling combination. The existing lens is not in the quality of L lens. But good enough, small enough and light weight. My M50 and 15-45 EF-M served me well in 3 days of cold and non stop raining days ( I dare not to change lens in the rain) in a well know scenic area and have never fail me even after that incident. On every trip, I pack my old 28-135 EF with adapter to be my telephoto lens when I need it. This combination handles very well, except it is on the heavy side.
I just hope that the keep the M system alive and give us a better 15-45 EF-M lens. For me, the 18-55mm ( I was using it until the 15-45 comes out)is not wide enough as a travel camera


----------



## Czardoom (Feb 9, 2021)

tomsop said:


> I am very cynical about this rumor - why buy existing stock of M products if no future - can someone be buying time and quieting the rumors to help move product? The problem with the rumor is it lacks details and has the functional effect of potentially giving false hope.


Why do you say "no future?" No reason to believe the rumor that the M series is ending any more than believing the rumor that it is not ending.

Why buy existing stock of M products? Because they are good products that will last for many years. The rumors shouldn't matter if you like the product, it seems to me.


----------



## tomsop (Feb 9, 2021)

Czardoom said:


> Why do you say "no future?" No reason to believe the rumor that the M series is ending any more than believing the rumor that it is not ending.
> 
> Why buy existing stock of M products? Because they are good products that will last for many years. The rumors shouldn't matter if you like the product, it seems to me.





I agree with you - I am trying to say the older rumors that the M is coming to an end had a chilling effect on sales so my cynical viewpoint sees the latest rumor as a way to salvage that so they can clear out inventory. They are just buying time and probably giving false hope - I hope I am wrong - I have a lot of M gear so I am sitting tight until there is clarity beyond rumors.


----------



## slclick (Feb 10, 2021)

2 things

The words 'product launch' were used

CR1

Neither of these suggest writing eulogies for the M line.


----------



## 3210123 (Feb 17, 2021)

For me the M6 mark II is the perfect camera body. The size of the body and lenses makes me carry it everywhere (something I did not want do with my 7D). With 22, 32 and 56mm primes the image quality is outstanding. To make things perfect I'd need only these sony mount lenses for the ef-m mount too:
Tamron 17-70 F2.8 Di III-A VC RXD​Tamron 70-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD​Maybe also a compact ef-m 11-16mm f/3.5 or f/2.8?


----------



## 3210123 (Feb 17, 2021)

JoFT said:


> I still hope for a bright future of the EF-M mount. I love to carry the M6II with me and I still hope for an M5MkII - with 8stop IBIS - and some more lenses.... especially a 100-400, a 56 f1.4 (But I can live with the Sigma....) as well as a 64nn f2.8 macro with 1:1 magnification amd some light....


I agree, specially with the need for tele zoom. However no need for Canon 56mm as the Sigma prime is perfect, it's my favorite of all the ef-m lenses (I'have the great Canon 22 f/2 and 32 f/1.4 lenses too).


----------



## SteveC (Feb 17, 2021)

3210123 said:


> I agree, specially with the need for tele zoom. However no need for Canon 56mm as the Sigma prime is perfect, it's my favorite of all the ef-m lenses (I'have the great Canon 22 f/2 and 32 f/1.4 lenses too).



Telezoom--at least a native telezoom--cannot happen so long as Canon insists on a 61mm maxium outside diameter.

I did buy the native Tamron 18-200mm, but it's noticeably fatter than 61mm. However, it practically lives on my M6-II. I did swap it for the 32mm prime the other day--for a while.


----------



## 3210123 (Feb 18, 2021)

SteveC said:


> Telezoom--at least a native telezoom--cannot happen so long as Canon insists on a 61mm maxium outside diameter.
> 
> I did buy the native Tamron 18-200mm, but it's noticeably fatter than 61mm. However, it practically lives on my M6-II. I did swap it for the 32mm prime the other day--for a while.


I did not even know Canon has a design principle of 61mm maximum diameter but it does seem like that looking at the lenses. Sticking to a specific diameter and still making zillions of filter sizes and lens hood sizes does not look so smart to me. I'd appreciate a lot more if the filters and lens hoods were interchangeable like in the Tamron series for the Sony M mount.

I really don't care if it is Sigma or Tamron making the ef-m lenses as long as someone supplies us with good semi-compact lens options at reasonable prices.


----------



## SteveC (Feb 18, 2021)

3210123 said:


> I did not even know Canon has a design principle of 61mm maximum diameter but it does seem like that looking at the lenses. Sticking to a specific diameter and still making zillions of filter sizes and lens hood sizes does not look so smart to me. I'd appreciate a lot more if the filters and lens hoods were interchangeable like in the Tamron series for the Sony M mount.
> 
> I really don't care if it is Sigma or Tamron making the ef-m lenses as long as someone supplies us with good semi-compact lens options at reasonable prices.


You might want to look at that Tamron then.

As far as the differing filter diameter, the suggestion I got was to use step up rings and leave them permanently attached to the lenses with the smaller filter diameters, so that you can still standardize. That won't help you with hood sizes though.


----------



## bf (Dec 13, 2021)

The year is about to end and still no firm news on the M line! My vote is for keeping the M line!


----------



## Dragon (Dec 13, 2021)

bf said:


> The year is about to end and still no firm news on the M line! My vote is for keeping the M line!


At this point, any change may not be possible. The M line (specifically the M50) is high volume and given the supply issues, any changes could result in a undeliverable product. Even the relatively low volume R3 is way out there. I am hopeful that no news here is actually good news, but only time will tell.


----------



## bf (Dec 13, 2021)

Dragon said:


> At this point, any change may not be possible. The M line (specifically the M50) is high volume and given the supply issues, any changes could result in a undeliverable product. Even the relatively low volume R3 is way out there. I am hopeful that no news here is actually good news, but only time will tell.


I really do hope for an M6-m3 type of offering... they did not even offer a $50 discount on M6-II this year so yes: it's rough times.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 13, 2021)

bf said:


> I really do hope for an M6-m3 type of offering... they did not even offer a $50 discount on M6-II this year so yes: it's rough times.


To look at it another way, Canon has raised prices on a lot of items.
At least the price has not gone up.


----------



## Dragon (Dec 13, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> To look at it another way, Canon has raised prices on a lot of items.
> At least the price has not gone up.





bf said:


> I really do hope for an M6-m3 type of offering... they did not even offer a $50 discount on M6-II this year so yes: it's rough times.


I would like to see an M5 upgrade with as many of the r5 features as possible in the power envelope and I would be willing to pay handsomely for one. The fact that there were no discounts is good news re the staying power of the M line. The only discounts this year were on the RP and R, both of which are clearly due for replacement (RA is already EOL), so maybe clearing inventory.


----------

