# New EOS M camera specifications [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 18, 2020)

> There has been a lot of chatter about new EOS M cameras coming in 2020, but we still haven’t nailed down what exactly is on the horizon.
> Below are specifications I have been sent for an upcoming EOS M camera, though the source didn’t know if this was the EOS M50 Mark II or an M camera above the EOS M6 Mark II.
> *Canon EOS M camera specifications:*
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Aug 18, 2020)

With the Digic X I am sure there are plenty of parts that don't meet the spec that can become a lower speed part for a APSC. Though, I think at this point they need to put the best processor and best EVF into every camera to really push them. People using any Canon EVF should feel like it is the best experience ever and if they upgrade they know they'll be getting the best EVF and AF performance possible. Cut out the lag and dispel peoples distrust of the EVF.


----------



## BakaBokeh (Aug 18, 2020)

Sounds great.


----------



## addola (Aug 18, 2020)

That's a lot of features for an EOS M camera, but the system doesn't have a lot of lenses.


----------



## Philrp (Aug 18, 2020)

All that is missing is the RF mount. Come on Canon!


----------



## woodman411 (Aug 18, 2020)

Unless the m50 moves upmarket, it seems likely this will be the m5 II or a new higher model, since dual card slots in a crop body is usually a high end feature (eg. 7d II).


----------



## docsmith (Aug 18, 2020)

I have really taken to my M6 II. Great little camera. I do use it as my main video camera, so IBIS would be tempting as would DPAF II. Throw in animal eye AF, and a 10 second buffer and I will likely upgrade. As for the 12 fps (H+), I have noticed that AF while shooting that fast is not as good as "H" mode (~7 fps). So, that is something I would watch.

But, even if I do not upgrade, I would love a higher end general purpose and telephoto zooms that are still smallish.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 18, 2020)

Philrp said:


> All that is missing is the RF mount. Come on Canon!


I have nothing to back this up but I think we may see a Canon M mount to RF adapter at the same time as the new cameras launch.

There needs to be more budget RF glass to really make this work but I could see it.


----------



## vangelismm (Aug 18, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I have nothing to back this up but I think we may see a Canon M mount to RF adapter at the same time as the new cameras launch.



Isn't impossible?


----------



## ReflexVE (Aug 18, 2020)

If the price is right this would be an automatic upgrade.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Aug 18, 2020)

Looks great. Really hope that means they add 1080p 120fps to the R5....don't see how an M body can have that and not the top of the line mirrorless.


----------



## mpb001 (Aug 18, 2020)

I personally would like to see a durable metal body M series camera. I do use a 5DIV with a 40 mm pancake lens to make it a little bit compact but an upper grade M series would be nice even though its not FF.


----------



## jtdiddy (Aug 18, 2020)

I had the M50 for a little bit. Fun little camera but the build just made it feel like a toy camera. Sold it and got a used a GH5 on a great deal


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 18, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A adaptor would not be a simple device, it would need optics and some way to convert the M lens communications to RF. The lens to sensor distance for a RF lens is shorter than the M, so a simple tube is impossible. I don't think Canon would produce one, because the additional optics would affect IQ which is not something users would want.



They could certainly do some kind of speedbooster-device but it would be complex and expensive. It'd almost certainly not work with older (eg current) bodies without some serious firmware update either. 

I think an RF->EF-M adaptor is something that people think they want, but when it would actually come to using it, they'd probably not use it much.

An APS-C RF body would be a specific niche product mostly for birders etc who want to use the new RF long lenses. I don't think there's much crossover with the current EF-M market who want a powerful lightweight camera with lightweight lenses. A more upmarket model for this market makes sense.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Aug 18, 2020)

Well! This sounds a fantastic little camera, I'd happily upgrade from my M5 if this spec turns up on a compact EOS-M body especially if it comes with twisty, flippy screen.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 18, 2020)

Its just a bit weird to have a $1500 camera and the only standard zoom you can mount on it is a $100 plastic 15-45...


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 18, 2020)

Whenever I'm travelling, if I find a camera store and try and stop in. None of them have ever had a single EOS M camera to show me. I'm intrigued by their size and could adapt my EF glass to it. But not willing to buy one sight unseen. I know they are bigger sellers outside of the US, so maybe less of an issue there. Just makes me wonder how committed to this market Canon really is. Seems like quite committed, given the amount of development still going on. 

Brian


----------



## todddominey (Aug 18, 2020)

Yes, but will it overheat? 

Seriously though. If this was a Mark 2 M50 (or...M60?) that would be an incredible little video camera for many people. Bring on the full-frame 4K and IBIS.


----------



## Boblblawslawblg (Aug 18, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Its just a bit weird to have a $1500 camera and the only standard zoom you can mount on it is a $100 plastic 15-45...


My Tamron 18-20mm 3.5-6.3 is a great little guy that I want to pair with this.


----------



## Daner (Aug 18, 2020)

Almost all of the RF lenses are way too large to work well with the M bodies. Even the adapted EF-S 17-55 is comically oversized. What would be ideal would be weather-sealed, high-quality EF-M lenses.


----------



## Upeo (Aug 18, 2020)

I was kinda hoping they'd keep the 24 MP sensor honestly. A 32 MP APS-C sensor is a lot to ask for of most lenses. I don't have an M6 mkII, but in most of the comparisons I've seen, the lenses seem a bit sharper on the 24 MP sensor. It's a minor gripe if they manage to put all of this in an M camera though depending on the price.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Aug 18, 2020)

RF lenses would look a bit daft on the M, surely any of the RF lenses you would really want are just comically too big and too front heavy for the M mount. Keeping M smaller seems to be the goal, Canon may have stats that M users don't upgrade to R, or perhaps hope if M uses do that they'll buy all new lenses.


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 18, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


But will it focus as well as the R5 & R6???


----------



## ReflexVE (Aug 18, 2020)

Upeo said:


> I was kinda hoping they'd keep the 24 MP sensor honestly. A 32 MP APS-C sensor is a lot to ask for of most lenses. I don't have an M6 mkII, but in most of the comparisons I've seen, the lenses seem a bit sharper on the 24 MP sensor. It's a minor gripe if they manage to put all of this in an M camera though depending on the price.


Where have you seen the two directly compared on image quality? I've been looking for basically the same reason and haven't found a good head to head comparison which seems odd for the direct successor in a line.


----------



## Colorado (Aug 18, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> Just makes me wonder how committed to this market Canon really is. Seems like quite committed, given the amount of development still going on.


I can't speak for Canon but the M series is their best seller by far so I would think they are indeed quite committed.


----------



## Rocky (Aug 18, 2020)

jtdiddy said:


> I had the M50 for a little bit. Fun little camera but the build just made it feel like a toy camera. Sold it and got a used a GH5 on a great deal


The "toy camera" served me well in three days outside at around 5 degree C. temperature with rain/snow all day without any damage.


----------



## 3serious (Aug 18, 2020)

dual card slots, IBIS, 12fps (assume mechanical) - we sure this is an M?


----------



## Upeo (Aug 18, 2020)

ReflexVE said:


> Where have you seen the two directly compared on image quality? I've been looking for basically the same reason and haven't found a good head to head comparison which seems odd for the direct successor in a line.



Christopher Frost over on Youtube has a series called Sharp enough for 32.5mp where he goes over his ef-m lenses and retests them on the M6 Mk-II. It's far from being a scientific method and seeing the images on a Youtube video is far from ideal, but it's what we have available unfortunately. His testing method is standardised though, so it makes it easier to compare.

The results are gonna vary from lens to lens naturally. Canon really did an awesome job with their primes on the M mount, which makes the fact they didn't make more so frustrating. But the 22 and 32 seem to handle the higher resolution count just fine. The Sigma primes seem to struggle a bit more, though in their case, he only compares the Sony versions he tested on the a5100 to the EF-M version on the M6 MkII. The optical formula didn't really change on the Sigma lenses though, so they should behave pretty similarly on the M50 and the a5100 for example.

Well, either way, here are the reviews for the Canon 22mm:









And for the Sigma trio (16, 30 and 56 respectively):














https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0J-MpASheU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9a7KXvboNI&t=155s

And for the kit lens while we're at it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7kt8_g0yOE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF-sYxVBeF8

Hope that helps. (Sorry, can only post 5 videos apparently)


----------



## Daner (Aug 18, 2020)

ReflexVE said:


> Where have you seen the two directly compared on image quality? I've been looking for basically the same reason and haven't found a good head to head comparison which seems odd for the direct successor in a line.



The 90D and 80D were likely to have been tested with the same lens in this comparison. Not sure about the M6MkII.








Canon EOS 90D Review


The Canon 90D is a DSLR that operates best when used as if it were a mirrorless camera. It offers live view autofocus that's competitive and easy to use, class-leading image quality, and video specs that'll appeal to the masses, all in a familiar, DSLR-shaped package.




www.dpreview.com


----------



## Joules (Aug 18, 2020)

3serious said:


> dual card slots, IBIS, 12fps (assume mechanical) - we sure this is an M?


The 12 FPS is odd, as the M6 II already does 14 FPS mechanical and even 30 in the electronic crop mode. A downgrade in speed makes no sense for higher end model, and dual cards seem unlikely for an M50.

Of course it may be that Canon is getting ready to take the gloves off and ripp their competitors a new one. But I don't think the M system really requires that mucb aggression.


----------



## Roy Hunte (Aug 18, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> Whenever I'm travelling, if I find a camera store and try and stop in. None of them have ever had a single EOS M camera to show me. I'm intrigued by their size and could adapt my EF glass to it. But not willing to buy one sight unseen. I know they are bigger sellers outside of the US, so maybe less of an issue there. Just makes me wonder how committed to this market Canon really is. Seems like quite committed, given the amount of development still going on.
> 
> Brian


Visit B&H if you happen to go to NYC I personally got to try one there.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 18, 2020)

Daner said:


> Almost all of the RF lenses are way too large to work well with the M bodies. Even the adapted EF-S 17-55 is comically oversized. What would be ideal would be weather-sealed, high-quality EF-M lenses.




Still, would be nice to be able to share the RF 100-500 between R5/R6 and a high-end APS-C M body, for example. Just like you could share lenses between EF/EF-S.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 18, 2020)

Boblblawslawblg said:


> My Tamron 18-*20*mm 3.5-6.3 is a great little guy that I want to pair with this.


Hmm, don't you find the zoom range a bit limiting?


----------



## ReflexVE (Aug 18, 2020)

Upeo said:


> Christopher Frost over on Youtube has a series called Sharp enough for 32.5mp where he goes over his ef-m lenses and retests them on the M6 Mk-II. It's far from being a scientific method and seeing the images on a Youtube video is far from ideal, but it's what we have available unfortunately. His testing method is standardised though, so it makes it easier to compare.
> 
> The results are gonna vary from lens to lens naturally. Canon really did an awesome job with their primes on the M mount, which makes the fact they didn't make more so frustrating. But the 22 and 32 seem to handle the higher resolution count just fine. The Sigma primes seem to struggle a bit more, though in their case, he only compares the Sony versions he tested on the a5100 to the EF-M version on the M6 MkII. The optical formula didn't really change on the Sigma lenses though, so they should behave pretty similarly on the M50 and the a5100 for example.
> 
> ...


Thank you for the replies! A little disappointed that my Sigma 16mm may not be ideal....


----------



## ReflexVE (Aug 18, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Hmm, don't you find the zoom range a bit limiting?


It's a "precision prime"


----------



## Trout Bum (Aug 18, 2020)

Dual card slots in the M line seems a bit much (yes, there are those who want/need that...) Just hope it doesn't make the body much bigger than my 6II.
Been waiting for IBIS to make handheld video practical, so I'm psyched!


----------



## adrian_bacon (Aug 18, 2020)

mpb001 said:


> I personally would like to see a durable metal body M series camera. I do use a 5DIV with a 40 mm pancake lens to make it a little bit compact but an upper grade M series would be nice even though its not FF.



I have an M5 with the 22mm pancake prime that I use as a small snapshot/daily carry. It's pretty nice. I also have an EF-M to EF adapter and the 10-18 STM and 18-135 STM EF-s lenses. With just those three lenses, I've got pretty good coverage.

I doubt Canon will make an APS-C RF camera that has the same RF mount as the full frame. That doesn't fit with what they've historically done with their mounts. They could have just kept EF when they introduced APS-C in DSLR and they didn't. Instead they did EF-s. Unless they're going to only make full frame lenses in RF, any APS-C camera will very likely have a different mount, especially if glass with an APS-C image circle will be made. EF-M serves its purpose and wouldn't need any changes unless Canon wants to add stuff like the control ring or something, then you'd possibly be looking at something like RF-C. Of course, I could be totally wrong too and Canon just could make the camera smart enough to do the right thing like it does with the EF adapter and EF-s glass.


----------



## mangobutter (Aug 18, 2020)

An EF-M 22-2 Mark II would be great. Reduced fringing, macro ability.


----------



## tataylino (Aug 18, 2020)

Specs sounds like higher than M6 II.
But if it is M50 II then that is a BIG upgrade.


----------



## Kane Clements (Aug 19, 2020)

Whilst the body will have to grow a bit to accommodate those features I'm not sure Canon is doing anything other than playing catch up with Sony and Fuji.

I recently sold my M50 and I'm looking for a crop frame mirrorless camera to complement my RP.

Currently the favourite to win the race is the Fuji X-T4. Which has all those features, great weather sealing (big issue for me) and overall build quality. Plus with a Viltrox adaptor I can use most of my Canon glass. The X-T4 has the size and weight to balance EF glass.

Canon has a huge lens range and maintains enviable brand loyalty. Trouble is they seem over the years to have taken it rather for granted and they are struggling to catch up. And not always making the best job of it. (The 90D springs to mind as a rather flawed stop gap that would have been better as a mirrorless camera in an RP size body).


----------



## HaroldC3 (Aug 19, 2020)

EFCS? Seems like they left it off the m6 II for some strange reason.


----------



## Eagle Eye (Aug 19, 2020)

Joules said:


> The 12 FPS is odd, as the M6 II already does 14 FPS mechanical and even 30 in the electronic crop mode. A downgrade in speed makes no sense for higher end model, and dual cards seem unlikely for an M50.
> 
> Of course it may be that Canon is getting ready to take the gloves off and ripp their competitors a new one. But I don't think the M system really requires that mucb aggression.


I agree that 12 FPS seems weird for the new flagship. In terms of aggression, by bifurcating their camera line into the M and R, Canon can essentially put whatever they want/can into the M bodies without fear of hurting their R-series sales. I wouldn’t be surprised if they roll out some M cameras that are impossible for Nikon and Sony to adequately compete with without Nikon and Sony cutting into sales of their full-frame models, which yield greater margins. Pretty genius, IMHO.


----------



## Skux (Aug 19, 2020)

A high end EOS M, as much as I want one, is rather pointless without high end M lenses.


----------



## terrellcwoods (Aug 19, 2020)

ReflexVE said:


> Where have you seen the two directly compared on image quality? I've been looking for basically the same reason and haven't found a good head to head comparison which seems odd for the direct successor in a line.





tataylino said:


> Specs sounds like higher than M6 II.
> But if it is M50 II then that is a BIG upgrade.


----------



## secant (Aug 19, 2020)

woodman411 said:


> Unless the m50 moves upmarket, it seems likely this will be the m5 II or a new higher model, since dual card slots in a crop body is usually a high end feature (eg. 7d II).


I agree as well. I don't see the M7 which is the flagship of the EOS M line to have 12 fps meanwhile the m6 II has 14 fps. Some people get triggered when we talk about the specs of the M50 II especially M6 II owners saying things like "you might as well just wish to have everything that's superior to the M6 II but at half the price". But these people don't understand, remember back when we were comparing lower end T3i T4i DSLRs vs higher end DSLR like the 7D? They all use the same sensor with full HD 1080 recording, but the differences are things like focus points, fps, build quality, weather sealing, etc. Technology keeps on advancing and you can have newer tech on a lower end camera thats not built as tough, with lower fps, dual card slots, but with new stuffs like IBIS and animal eye AF. I don't see how thats contradicting.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 19, 2020)

Being that it doesn't say removeable EVF, I would guess that this is the M50, as the popularity of the M6 mk IIis it's EVF removeability that some just put away somewhere and never use. We'll see.


----------



## vjlex (Aug 19, 2020)

If this is priced right, this might be the smaller, second body I'm on the market for. My M3 is long in the tooth, but I still want to be sure I know where Canon is heading with regards to APS-C and the R mount. I'm not one who particularly believes that an APS-C R-mount camera is coming. But because of the M-line, I'm more likely to keep my EF lenses rather than move over to RF anytime soon.

Either way, no main body R5 anywhere in sight, so this body is definitely far off for me (maybe around this time next year if I've forgiven Canon). Hopefully I'll have my R5 by then.


----------



## Nelu (Aug 19, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> With the Digic X I am sure there are plenty of parts that don't meet the spec that can become a lower speed part for a APSC. Though, I think at this point they need to put the best processor and best EVF into every camera to really push them. People using any Canon EVF should feel like it is the best experience ever and if they upgrade they know they'll be getting the best EVF and AF performance possible. Cut out the lag and dispel peoples distrust of the EVF.


When everything is “the best” nothing is the best.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Aug 19, 2020)

Philrp said:


> All that is missing is the RF mount. Come on Canon!


Cold day in hell before I buy an EF-M camera, just make it RF and stop wasting our time with the dead-end mount


----------



## AlanWill (Aug 19, 2020)

7DII replacement? I was rather hoping that the flagship APS-C would be an RF mount. Maybe the new M-mount APS-C will become the M1?


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 19, 2020)

The specs look like someone analysing the R5/R6 and applying it sensibly to a higher end M series.

12fps may be heat conservation if they are increasing it elsewhere.

The M6 II and it's predecessors must be selling well enough for Canon to consider this investment. The lower models probably sell better so I would expect them to upgrade first - especially as the M6 II is coming up for 1 year old. Canon did the R5/R6 I think 2 years after the R - but that could well be as the design for those took longer and required interim models using existing tech. I'm not sure an upgraded high end M series this soon makes sense, nor do I think the mid-range will get specs above the high end....

Yet, as there is a slight possibility, I will hold off a second M6 II - I always prefer 2 bodies, and pairing it with a R5/R or even a 5Ds/5IV is a bit of a mismatch.


----------



## brad-man (Aug 19, 2020)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Cold day in hell before I buy an EF-M camera, just make it RF and stop wasting our time with the dead-end mount


What is the meaning of "dead-end mount"?


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 19, 2020)

AlanWill said:


> 7DII replacement? I was rather hoping that the flagship APS-C would be an RF mount. Maybe the new M-mount APS-C will become the M1?


I agree with you for a number of reasons which was in another thread about the M7.

I think Canon will either hope that some of the APS owners will transition to RP or discounted R, and that for the enthusiast / pros using 7D II, they will offer a Rx range. Their challenge will be how to balance it with the R6.


----------



## deleteme (Aug 19, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I have nothing to back this up but I think we may see a Canon M mount to RF adapter at the same time as the new cameras launch.
> 
> There needs to be more budget RF glass to really make this work but I could see it.


I think the size of the RF lenses negate the advantages of the size of the M series.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 19, 2020)

brad-man said:


> What is the meaning of "dead-end mount"?



"Dead end mount" means "Mr. Majestyk doesn't like it and he believes his tastes are objective facts rather than just his opinion."


----------



## Cat_Interceptor (Aug 19, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> RF lenses would look a bit daft on the M, surely any of the RF lenses you would really want are just comically too big and too front heavy for the M mount. Keeping M smaller seems to be the goal, Canon may have stats that M users don't upgrade to R, or perhaps hope if M uses do that they'll buy all new lenses.



As a M6 II owner, you could not be more wrong about the "too big and too heavy" comment. I've had 400 2.8 on it and my 100-400 II just about lives on the adapter. It just works and just isnt an issue.

Why do people keep saying this when actual owners keep say "Wait up a sec here...."



Joules said:


> The 12 FPS is odd, as the M6 II already does 14 FPS mechanical and even 30 in the electronic crop mode. A downgrade in speed makes no sense for higher end model, and dual cards seem unlikely for an M50.
> 
> Of course it may be that Canon is getting ready to take the gloves off and ripp their competitors a new one. But I don't think the M system really requires that mucb aggression.



The 14fps is in shutter priority ie it doesnt really try to achieve focus between shots. The actual max speed is the tracking priority H+ which is effectively limited to 7fps. The 30fps is a burst of what is effectly a 1-2 second video grab that you need to extract the image manually. 12fps if it does it in tracking priority is a very noticable step up.

TBH most of the CR1 in this case ticks off the boxes for a potential 7D II replacement. The already superb 32mb sensor? Dual card slot? EVF? higher speed? New Digic? IBIS? All checks off nicely. Will it have different tracking cases? Thats somethign I miss from the 7D II.

Having some sort of speedbooster adapter from RF to EF-M might work????? Dont know how possible but I guess given how well Canon adapters work if they do it it'll make RF AND EF doable. That would be interesting!

SO IF this camera has dual card slots, IBIS etc, it'll prolly be bigger than all the other M series bodies so it could possibly take a bigger battery. TBH the only thing then that will make it clear wether this is the mythical 7D replacement is the weatherproofing and rugged build. THAT is a absolute must no arguement brokered requirement - and that's where I would like to have clarity on this rumoured camera. Rugged body? Thats gonna be the 7D replacement!


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Aug 19, 2020)

Would be funny if this one didn't overheat as quickly in 4k60 as R5/R6 

If it has dual card slots it has to be a high end M (like M5 II) and have a better build quality then the M50 (toyish quality) and hopefully some weather sealing.
I would like to use it as a 3rd camera with the 32mm f1.4 for weddings as the other camera's have my 24-70mm and 70-200mm.


----------



## PhotoGenerous (Aug 19, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> As a M6 II owner, you could not be more wrong about the "too big and too heavy" comment. I've had 400 2.8 on it and my 100-400 II just about lives on the adapter. It just works and just isnt an issue.
> 
> Why do people keep saying this when actual owners keep say "Wait up a sec here...."



As an M6 owner I played around with adapting heavy lenses, but after the novelty wore off, the only non-native lens I use with it is the 50 f1.8 STM because of the small size and weight.

I think we just negated each other.

On the other hand, after hearing so many comments about balance with the R5 and giant lenses like the 28-70 f2 (I have the lens in hand, but no body to test it out for myself), it reminds me of my experience with adapting lenses to the M mount anyway. If Canon makes lenses heavy enough, the difference in weight between an R and M mount camera will be negligible.


----------



## Yasko (Aug 19, 2020)

Specs sound very nice for a „shoot to go“ camera. Let‘s see.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 19, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> As a M6 II owner, you could not be more wrong about the "too big and too heavy" comment. I've had 400 2.8 on it and my 100-400 II just about lives on the adapter. It just works and just isnt an issue.
> 
> Why do people keep saying this when actual owners keep say "Wait up a sec here...."[..]



I've found that using the 100-400II on an M6II is vastly improved by the Smallrig LCC2516 L bracket. It adds an extra wooden finger grip that makes it easier to control the lens when your other hand can't support the lens. Like when you need to hold nature out of the way 
I mostly use it for dragonflies, so weird angles and tall grass are par for the course.


----------



## Bahrd (Aug 19, 2020)

PhotoGenerous said:


> [...]
> I think we just negated each other.
> [...]


Or complemented?


----------



## fox40phil (Aug 19, 2020)

APS-C R please!!!
Look at Nikon, Sony and Even Fuji... the first two have awesome APS-C cameras with the same mount!!
And some really nice birding lenses for not even 3,5k€....(100-500  ).

Canon is doing it wrong to have 3 mounts at the same time!

I wouldn’t buy an M because of the mount, lenses and toyish build and design. Only the 6II would an option to me with build in evf!!! But not like this!!
A real 7D - like model is still missing for a long time now....


----------



## Adrianf (Aug 19, 2020)

I love my M50. Add some modern focussing and a faster frame rate and it would be a step towards the 7D3 that I always wanted.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 19, 2020)

Adrianf said:


> I love my M50. Add some modern focussing and a faster frame rate and it would be a step towards the 7D3 that I always wanted.



My problem with the M50 is the lack of external controls. The M6 is perfect in this regards. Just needs an EVF, some weather sealing and sharper, more detailed 4K.


----------



## mppix (Aug 19, 2020)

vangelismm said:


> Isn't impossible?


Possible with optics, i.e. a RF to EF-M speed booster design.


----------



## mppix (Aug 19, 2020)

fox40phil said:


> APS-C R please!!!
> Look at Nikon, Sony and Even Fuji... the first two have awesome APS-C cameras with the same mount!!
> And some really nice birding lenses for not even 3,5k€....(100-500  ).
> 
> ...



Genuine question, what features has a 7D that are not covered with a R6?


----------



## Joules (Aug 19, 2020)

mppix said:


> Genuine question, what features has a 7D that are not covered with a R6?


APS-C reach, weather sealing, OVF. The people that demand a true 7D successor all mean different things, but among them there is a vocal group that wants a rugged body for wildlife applications. And that's more of an R5 than R6, but they also want it at the low cost typically associated with APS-C. I still doubt they'll get what they want from Canon.

For those that reach doesn't matter, or those with sufficient budget, the R6 and R5 are indeed good replacements I think.


----------



## i_SH (Aug 19, 2020)

Yes, 12 fps looks somewhat unusual. Perhaps the M7 camera will have a new matrix of 40 - 45 megapixels?


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Aug 19, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> Whenever I'm travelling, if I find a camera store and try and stop in. None of them have ever had a single EOS M camera to show me. I'm intrigued by their size and could adapt my EF glass to it. But not willing to buy one sight unseen. I know they are bigger sellers outside of the US, so maybe less of an issue there. Just makes me wonder how committed to this market Canon really is. Seems like quite committed, given the amount of development still going on.
> 
> Brian


Here in France we got some models in local stores but not that much (and sometimes not at all) and it seems to me the biggest sales are made from websites indeed.
For instance, at the time it was launched, I had to go to another city to have an EOS M6 in hands before purchase... which is quite unusual, and first time I had to do that for a "mainstream" camera.
EOS M50 can be found easily everywhere on the net and in regular stores though.


----------



## mikedidi46 (Aug 19, 2020)

I own an M50 and also an 80D, and have been searching for an upgrade to one of them. So I am interested if this new body could be a miniature 7D series. I am currently looking into 3-4 bodies, but I will need something with IBIS as at my age I do have some hand shake.


----------



## Antono Refa (Aug 19, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Its just a bit weird to have a $1500 camera and the only standard zoom you can mount on it is a $100 plastic 15-45...



With the Canon mount adapter EF-EOS M, you can mount any EF zoom on it.


----------



## DTCOM (Aug 19, 2020)

Why are they still continuing this series? They already have nice mirrorless models, nice DSLRs, nice compacts...


----------



## Eagle Eye (Aug 19, 2020)

DTCOM said:


> Why are they still continuing this series? They already have nice mirrorless models, nice DSLRs, nice compacts...


It certainly is baffling that a company would continue to innovate one of their best-selling product lines.


----------



## canonnews (Aug 19, 2020)

Well, some EOS-M's are certainly due but this one seems an odd duck. Since about everytime I've dissed a rumor, i've been wrong, i've STFU from dissing this one.

But what it looks like to me is it's someone's "wish list" based upon the R's without considering what the M's currently can do.

12 fps isn't going to wow people when the M6 Mark II shoots 14. Yes, that may be shutter priority, but EVERYONE markets their fps on shutter priority. The thing even shoots up to 30 fps in a crop mode. With AF. This has to at least match the M6 II on marketable specifications if not exceed it, and it doesn't seem to be doing that.

Then again, it's a CR1.

I think what they need to do is make a EOS M7 - and a Canon R7.

No APS-C lenses outside of maybe a 17-70mm on the RF side, and the EOS-M side still continue to turn out 61mm diminutive lenses.

Probably the best of both worlds really. Canon is good at allowing the consumer to choose. What they have choosen to date, is overwelmingly the EOS-M

Also - some people get too focus on what they want and assume the entire market feels the same way as they do. It's never the case. The smaller and lighter cameras do have a purpose, especially over in asia where carryon restrictions really eat into what you can carry on a plane these days.


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 19, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> As a M6 II owner, you could not be more wrong about the "too big and too heavy" comment. I've had 400 2.8 on it and my 100-400 II just about lives on the adapter. It just works and just isnt an issue.


Wow. I have an M6 II and the 100-400mm II, and I dislike it immensely for extended use (like a few hours continual hand holding). I thus resorted to a monopod, but I lose flexibility depending on what I am shooting. I cannot imagine putting on your 400 2.8 or my 600 4.0, truly, unless it is on a bean bag. The balance would not be to my liking, but it clearly is ok for you.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 19, 2020)

DTCOM said:


> Why are they still continuing this series? They already have nice mirrorless models, nice DSLRs, nice compacts...



Get the M6 mark II + 22mm, 11-22mm, 32mm, Sigma 56mm. 
No other system comes close to that package in quality, size + weight and usability.

Even the small RP is big and expensive with comparable lenses.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 19, 2020)

canonnews said:


> [..]
> I think what they need to do is make a EOS M7 - and a Canon R7.
> [..]



You mean like the M6II/90D release: same internals like the sensor, digic, card slot, but different externals.

I'm not sure what Canon could offer in a future M camera the next few years to make me replace the M6II, I specifically bought it to have no EVF  I bet in a year or 2 we'll get an M400 with a fast sensor, IBIS and DPAF II, that would be very tempting, I still like the original M body the most. The M6II is both too big and too small for my liking. M+22mm fit in a coat pocket, M6II+22mm not so much.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 19, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Get the M6 mark II + 22mm, 11-22mm, 32mm, Sigma 56mm.
> No other system comes close to that package in quality, size + weight and usability.
> 
> Even the small RP is big and expensive with comparable lenses.



I have all the above and I'm tempted to get the Sigma 16mm as well in case going abroad for a vacation becomes a realistic option again. Let's see what happens first, the pandemic ending or having all my kids potty trained


----------



## Stu_bert (Aug 19, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I've found that using the 100-400II on an M6II is vastly improved by the Smallrig LCC2516 L bracket. It adds an extra wooden finger grip that makes it easier to control the lens when your other hand can't support the lens. Like when you need to hold nature out of the way
> I mostly use it for dragonflies, so weird angles and tall grass are par for the course.


Thanks for this - I did look at the smallrig as a way of increasing the comfort / balance. I guess I was looking for something that gave me width like this one, and depth that a battery grip would offer.

Thus I came across these (custom battery grip) - https://www.custombatterygrips.com/store/product/canon-eos-m6-mark-ii-battery-grip - but was not entirely convinced by the grip approach - unless I could feel it then the angular approach may not be comfortable. It also makes (for me) the body look a little ugly, but I understand they did this as curves / smooth lines are more costly to manufacturer I guess....

so my hunt continues - ha ha.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 19, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> With the Canon mount adapter EF-EOS M, you can mount any EF zoom on it.



I know but none of them are great on the M6 sensor but at least they are huge and heavy.
For example the EF-S 15-85 with the adapter weights 700g, compared to 130g for the 15-45.

If i need to adapt 700g lenses, i rather get the RP with the 24-105 STM, that combo weights less.

We need a 15-50 type of compact zoom which is sharper, has better build quality and a bit brighter than F6.3.
I don't care if weights 250g instead of 130g.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 19, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I have all the above and I'm tempted to get the Sigma 16mm as well in case going abroad for a vacation becomes a realistic option again. Let's see what happens first, the pandemic ending or having all my kids potty trained



Yes, i want the Sigma 16 1.4 also. Should be great for low light photography / astro.
Maybe Canon will come out with that 15mm F2 this year.


----------



## canonnews (Aug 19, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> You mean like the M6II/90D release: same internals like the sensor, digic, card slot, but different externals.
> 
> I'm not sure what Canon could offer in a future M camera the next few years to make me replace the M6II, I specifically bought it to have no EVF  I bet in a year or 2 we'll get an M400 with a fast sensor, IBIS and DPAF II, that would be very tempting, I still like the original M body the most. The M6II is both too big and too small for my liking. M+22mm fit in a coat pocket, M6II+22mm not so much.


Yeah you almost need two M's .. I do miss the compactness of the original M.

But why not? they did it with the 80D and 90D and the EOS-M's why not carry that forward to the R line? No one lost their minds over the 90D and M6 Mark II, and the M5 and the 80D.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 19, 2020)

Skux said:


> A high end EOS M, as much as I want one, is rather pointless without high end M lenses.



HUGE number of easily adaptable EF lenses out there. Chances are you may already have one or two. This will work amazingly with lenses such as the EF 100-400L II 

Just because there are new RF lenses doesn't mean the EF lenses have suddenly vanished.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 19, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> New DIGIC Processor



Maybe this simply means "new for the M series", which hasn't had a DIGIC X processor yet. OR perhaps a DIGIC 9 as a simplified DIGIC X with smaller cache, etc.


----------



## Upeo (Aug 19, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> Maybe this simply means "new for the M series", which hasn't had a DIGIC X processor yet. OR perhaps a DIGIC 9 as a simplified DIGIC X with smaller cache, etc.



If I'm not mistaken, both the DIGIC 7 and 8 were introduced on cropped sensor cameras before going to the full frame ones so it really wouldn't be surprising to see an entirely new processor here that they'll then scale up.


----------



## idahobill (Aug 19, 2020)

This must be the new M7 spec. It seems to incorporate all the advances of the R6 to the M series. Same shutter speed and DPAF II points to similar spec’d processor. 
If they maintain the size of an M50, and release new M lenses, it will be a very good camera.


----------



## geffy (Aug 19, 2020)

They will sell a shedload of these I have three M cameras on the go and all have a niche, from a fixed fisheye to the 22 on an old m with a viewfinder for street, i am not a lens changer and this body sounds a winner


----------



## Czardoom (Aug 19, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> As a M6 II owner, you could not be more wrong about the "too big and too heavy" comment. I've had 400 2.8 on it and my 100-400 II just about lives on the adapter. It just works and just isnt an issue.
> 
> Why do people keep saying this when actual owners keep say "Wait up a sec here...."


Because a lot of other owners of M camera owners say, "No way I can use EF or EF-S lenses on my M. They are an ergonomic nightmare!" I am one of those owners and sold my EF and EF-S lenses when I bought my M5. I found only M series lenses were a good fit. Sure, you can put big and heavy lenses on your M camera with the adapter, but that completely defeats the purpose of having a tiny camera that is easy to carry around. The camera is way too light for balance and the grip way too small for one handed carry and shooting. I'm not talking huge telephotos here - because they are big and heavy on every camera. So, yes, something like the 400mm will actually be less different than some thing more mid-size. 

So, yes, for many M series owners, it is an issue.


----------



## jolyonralph (Aug 19, 2020)

Upeo said:


> If I'm not mistaken, both the DIGIC 7 and 8 were introduced on cropped sensor cameras before going to the full frame ones so it really wouldn't be surprising to see an entirely new processor here that they'll then scale up.



I think there's a reason they went from DIGIC 8 to DIGIC X, and that's because they knew the DIGIC 9 would come later.


----------



## ctk (Aug 19, 2020)

I hope this isn't too expensive (>$1300) and I hope they make a premium 15-xx zoom to go with it.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 19, 2020)

ctk said:


> I hope this isn't too expensive (>$1300) and I hope they make a premium 15-xx zoom to go with it.



The present-day 15-45 gets a pretty bad rap--apparently before I bought my M-50 there was an 18-55 EF-M lens that was considerably better. I'm not sure whether that's actually discontinued or not.


----------



## idahobill (Aug 20, 2020)

ctk said:


> I hope this isn't too expensive (>$1300) and I hope they make a premium 15-xx zoom to go with it.


I would think this spec'd camera would be in that range. It appears like essentially an R6 with an APC sensor in a small form factor.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 20, 2020)

The EOS M5 Mark II/M7 rumors are starting to shape up into what sounds like a kickass little camera . For the processor, it'll likely be a lower Mhz DIGIC X or possibly a new DIGIC 9 processor. Either way, I hope they add animal eye AF as that feature already looks incredibly helpful on the R5 and R6. 



blackcoffee17 said:


> Its just a bit weird to have a $1500 camera and the only standard zoom you can mount on it is a $100 plastic 15-45...



There is already a rumor that a "higher end" EF-M kit lens will launch along side the M5 Mark II/M7 when it comes out later this year. I'm sure it'll come as one of the bundled packages, as the current 15-45mm kit lens just doesn't cut it on a 32MP sensor.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Aug 20, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The present-day 15-45 gets a pretty bad rap--apparently before I bought my M-50 there was an 18-55 EF-M lens that was considerably better. I'm not sure whether that's actually discontinued or not.



The EF-M 18-55mm lens has been discontinued (last bundled with the EOS M3), as the 15-45mm lens replaced it. Though there some places where you can still buy it new. While the 18-55mm lens had better build quality (metal exterior and mount), some tests online show the 15-45mm lens is actually a little sharper then the 18-55mm lens when paired with an EOS M camera using the 24MP sensor.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 20, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The present-day 15-45 gets a pretty bad rap--apparently before I bought my M-50 there was an 18-55 EF-M lens that was considerably better. I'm not sure whether that's actually discontinued or not.



I had both the 18-55 and 15-45. I would say the 15-45 is at least as good (at least my copy). It's quite sharp in the center of the image and soft in the corners (not so important) but images just look a bit flat and dull. Its a bit too much for the 32MP sensor.
The 15-45 is cheaply built but quite solid and IS is very efficient. There is still place for a better lens, every other system has a more premium standard lens.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 20, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I had both the 18-55 and 15-45. I would say the 15-45 is at least as good (at least my copy). It's quite sharp in the center of the image and soft in the corners (not so important) but images just look a bit flat and dull. Its a bit too much for the 32MP sensor.
> The 15-45 is cheaply built but quite solid and IS is very efficient. There is still place for a better lens, every other system has a more premium standard lens.



Unfortunately since you (apparently) typoed in one of your two paragraphs, I'm not sure which one is your comment concerning the 18-55.

But I agree, the system really needs a better standard zoom.

I've been using a native EF-M Tamron 18-200 without trouble (many people have had difficulty with it) on the M50 and now the M6-II as my sort of general purpose camera. It's a bit fatter than 61mm but not so fat as to look ridiculous.

But then again, I've been known to stick an EF adapter on the thing and go to town with a 100-400 II L, also. (In fact I think I posted a zoo pic of a snow leopard using that setup.)


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 20, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Unfortunately since you (apparently) typoed in one of your two paragraphs, I'm not sure which one is your comment concerning the 18-55.
> 
> But I agree, the system really needs a better standard zoom.
> 
> ...



Someone said the 18-55 is better. I commented that i had both the 18-55 and the 15-45 and i think the 15-45 is at least as good if not better than the 18-55 but neither are great, just OK.


----------



## amfoto1 (Aug 20, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> Whenever I'm travelling, if I find a camera store and try and stop in. None of them have ever had a single EOS M camera to show me. I'm intrigued by their size and could adapt my EF glass to it. But not willing to buy one sight unseen. I know they are bigger sellers outside of the US, so maybe less of an issue there. Just makes me wonder how committed to this market Canon really is. Seems like quite committed, given the amount of development still going on.
> 
> Brian


I picked up a used M5 a couple months ago and have been having fun with it. Only cost around $300 US (~ $350 after tax, shipping), in really nice condition (open box demo unit). 90 day warranty, 14 day no-questions-asked right of return. What can go wrong?

Really like the EVF, I'm using with 4 manual focus lenses (12mm f/2.8, 21mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.1 & 90mm f/2.5 macro. I'll probably get some AF primes sometime, I've gotten lazy and struggling with manual focus a bit.

I really wanted an EVF... not an add-on like M6 Mk II. Only M5 & M50 have that. Also wanted dedicated Exposure Compensation dual, which M5 has, but other M-series don't. 

Very compact, light weight, even with lenses... Especially compared to Canon 7D series & 5D series DSLRs I use for work (all with battery grips & often big telephotos up to 8 lb. 500mm).

The little M5 is just plain fun, by comparison. The only thing I don't like is the small battery that the EVF drains quickly... Maybe 200 to 400 shots at best. I bought a spare LP-E17 along with the camera. No battery grips avail. for M series, either. 

If you are comfortable with Canon DSLRS, you will probably like an M50 or M5. If you never use accessory flash, M6 Mk II sounds great with it's auxiliary EVF (that goes in the hot shoe, so can't use flash at the same time).


----------



## SteveC (Aug 20, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> Whenever I'm travelling, if I find a camera store and try and stop in. None of them have ever had a single EOS M camera to show me. I'm intrigued by their size and could adapt my EF glass to it. But not willing to buy one sight unseen. I know they are bigger sellers outside of the US, so maybe less of an issue there. Just makes me wonder how committed to this market Canon really is. Seems like quite committed, given the amount of development still going on.
> 
> Brian



That's interesting because I bought my M50 and M6-II both from my local brick and mortar.

Not only that, but just yesterday I watched them sell an M6 (not even an M6-II) to somebody, and they also sold him the adapter. Not sure if he bought any lenses; I got the impression he has quite a few EF lenses.


----------



## ashmadux (Aug 20, 2020)

Daner said:


> Almost all of the RF lenses are way too large to work well with the M bodies. Even the adapted EF-S 17-55 is comically oversized. What would be ideal would be weather-sealed, high-quality EF-M lenses.



Efs 10-22 and the Ef 35 f2 IS work fantastic. Been using them for years. I'm wondering if I should purchase a m6 right now or wait ... until ????

The eye af is a very big deal like Ibis...I wish it was coming soon I would hold off. Literally want to Purchase NOW


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 20, 2020)

If it has IBIS, same flip out screen like M50, no-crop 4K 60 with no overheating, then if the price is right, I'll get it instead of waiting for an R camera that has no overheating at 4K60.

If it does have overheat, I may get it anyway, as long as the cool down is no more than 15 minutes for at least a full 30 minute of continuous recording. And it can NOT have and reduction in record time from using non-video recording features (e.g., taking photos, changing settings, leaving camera on...)


----------



## Kane Clements (Aug 20, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The present-day 15-45 gets a pretty bad rap--apparently before I bought my M-50 there was an 18-55 EF-M lens that was considerably better. I'm not sure whether that's actually discontinued or not.



I don't know why you say the 15-45 gets a bad rap. On YOuTube Christopher frost did a head to head review and the 15-45 was superior to the old kit lens. I trust his lens reviews. Best on the internet.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 20, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> I don't know why you say the 15-45 gets a bad rap. On YOuTube Christopher frost did a head to head review and the 15-45 was superior to the old kit lens. I trust his lens reviews. Best on the internet.



People get wildly different results, which leads me to think there's a problem with consistency at the factory, one week perfect lenses, the other week soft and decentered lenses. I'm happy enough with my copy, but I'm not seeing much difference compared to the 18-55mm.


----------



## Antono Refa (Aug 20, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I know but none of them are great on the M6 sensor but at least they are huge and heavy.



As noted many times over the the last decade or so, optics hasn't improved as much as electronics, leading to the gap you've mentioned. That's one of the reasons I'm in no hurry to upgrade from the 5DmkIV to the R5 - even if I'll get a 50% improvement in sharpness, the glass will be that much heavier & pricier.

Between Canon's positioning of the EOS-M as light & compact, the shrinking market, and Canon's transition to the RF mount, I wouldn't bet a red cent on Canon releasing an EOS-M lens that sharp.


----------



## Kane Clements (Aug 20, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> People get wildly different results, which leads me to think there's a problem with consistency at the factory, one week perfect lenses, the other week soft and decentered lenses. I'm happy enough with my copy, but I'm not seeing much difference compared to the 18-55mm.



Fair point well made. I wasn't aware of that. Mine was a lovely lens.

I wonder about Canon's quality control sometimes. Consistency in 90D production was possibly not as it might have been. Some of the issues might have origins in the new 32 Mb sensor, yet some users seem to have experienced problems. I had one for a while and it was a pig. I micro focussed my 100-400 Mk II to death on the body and could never get consistent results. In the end I returned it and got an RP. At which point the 100-400 started behaving itself! 

I wonder what that was all about? Not!


----------



## ctk (Aug 20, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The present-day 15-45 gets a pretty bad rap--apparently before I bought my M-50 there was an 18-55 EF-M lens that was considerably better. I'm not sure whether that's actually discontinued or not.


18-xx is no sale for me, I need a standard zoom to cover 24mm EFL on the wide end and probably 60-70mm EFL on the long end. And it's gotta be good for landscapes/architecture at the wide end (i.e. sharp corner to corner, at least stopped down)

Something like a 15-45 F/2-2.8 IS would be perfect, though even a 15-45 F/4 with decent IQ and QC would be enough to win me over.


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Aug 20, 2020)

canonnews said:


> ...
> 
> 12 fps isn't going to wow people when the M6 Mark II shoots 14. Yes, that may be shutter priority, but EVERYONE markets their fps on shutter priority. The thing even shoots up to 30 fps in a crop mode. With AF. This has to at least match the M6 II on marketable specifications if not exceed it, and it doesn't seem to be doing that.
> ...


Valid points.
Though, even if I admit it's probably a very personal view, I would vastly prefer they give us back the ability to shoot bursts with finger on screen, like it was possible to do with the first M6 iteration, and only 10FPS. I don't understand why they removed this feature on M6II ?
Combined with a better AF operation, it would be fantastic on such a compact set.


----------



## canonnews (Aug 20, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> I don't know why you say the 15-45 gets a bad rap. On YOuTube Christopher frost did a head to head review and the 15-45 was superior to the old kit lens. I trust his lens reviews. Best on the internet.


except that the copy variation is WILD with the 15-45. he must have lucked with a good copy, and seen an pink unicorn as well.


----------



## canonnews (Aug 20, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> As noted many times over the the last decade or so, optics hasn't improved as much as electronics, leading to the gap you've mentioned. That's one of the reasons I'm in no hurry to upgrade from the 5DmkIV to the R5 - even if I'll get a 50% improvement in sharpness, the glass will be that much heavier & pricier.
> 
> Between Canon's positioning of the EOS-M as light & compact, the shrinking market, and Canon's transition to the RF mount, I wouldn't bet a red cent on Canon releasing an EOS-M lens that sharp.



The 32mm F1.4 waves at you. it resolves *more* than the 32.5MP sensor and AA filter can do in the center, and easily outresolves the 24mp sensor. it outresolves the 24MP .. wide.. freaking.. open.

I suspect if they do a 50-55mm EF-M it will do the same as the 32mm. Canon has it nicely dialed in with those optics.


----------



## hachu21 (Aug 20, 2020)

canonnews said:


> The 32mm F1.4 waves at you. it resolves *more* than the 32.5MP sensor and AA filter can do in the center, and easily outresolves the 24mp sensor. it outresolves the 24MP .. wide.. freaking.. open.
> 
> I suspect if they do a 50-55mm EF-M it will do the same as the 32mm. Canon has it nicely dialed in with those optics.


I can confirm that the 32mm can be used @1.4 without any concern on my M6 mk1. As sharp or sharper corner to corner than 22 f/2. 
Unfortunately, I can't say that for the EF 50 1.8 or the EF 50 1.4 that I both had.


----------



## Antono Refa (Aug 20, 2020)

canonnews said:


> The 32mm F1.4 waves at you. it resolves *more* than the 32.5MP sensor and AA filter can do in the center



Source?


----------



## SteveC (Aug 20, 2020)

Good info on the 15-45 from people, thanks. I basically found it too constraining a range for a walk-around lens and hardly ever used it. (I found a used Tamron EF mount 18-200 and adapted it, eventually springing for a new native EF mount version.) 

I said it got a bad rap (meaning from other users), not that I personally had had a bad experience with it--I just have had no use for the thing. I may, for all I know, have one of the good ones. I certainly didn't want ANOTHER one as a kit when I bought the M6-II (and the other alternative was also a range covered by my Tammy), but found I was slightly better off getting that kit (to get the viewfinder) then turning around and selling the 15-45. (If Canon doesn't like people doing that with their kits they can damned well offer M6-II plus viewfinder and _no_ lenses as a kit. I _know_ some of their retailers actually asked them why the hell they don't do that and got no real answer.) I *do* actually have a couple of the primes and the wide zoom (11-22? something like that)--I skipped the 28mm macro.


----------



## Rocky (Aug 20, 2020)

I also have both the 15-45 and the 18-55 EF-M. Optically, both are about the same. Good enough for not too critical use. I found that the 15-45 is more versatile for the "shot and run tourist". Before I got the 15-45, I need to do a lot of stiches on scenery. The 18mm is just not wide enough. Even the 15-45 looks cheap and all plastic. It survived 3 days outside shooting at about 5 degree C., with rain and snow all day.


----------



## R Ramina (Aug 20, 2020)

Kane Clements said:


> Whilst the body will have to grow a bit to accommodate those features I'm not sure Canon is doing anything other than playing catch up with Sony and Fuji.
> 
> I recently sold my M50 and I'm looking for a crop frame mirrorless camera to complement my RP.
> 
> ...


Totally agree! if the new M is to worth something, it has at least to be competitive with the Fuji X-T4.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 20, 2020)

Rocky said:


> I also have both the 15-45 and the 18-55 EF-M. Optically, both are about the same. Good enough for not too critical use. I found that the 15-45 is more versatile for the "shot and run tourist". Before I got the 15-45, I need to do a lot of stiches on scenery. The 18mm is just not wide enough. Even the 15-45 looks cheap and all plastic. It survived 3 days outside shooting at about 5 degree C., with rain and snow all day.



It died on the 4th day??


----------



## Rocky (Aug 20, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> It died on the 4th day??


It did not die at all. right after that, I use it for the rest of the trip for an other month, no problem. That was one and a half years ago. It was on the M50. I am still using both of them now. I did not change the lens in those 3 days


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 20, 2020)

Rocky said:


> It did not die at all. right after that, I use it for the rest of the trip for an other month, no problem. That was one and a half years ago. It was on the M50. I am still using both of them now. I did not change the lens in those 3 days


sweet


----------



## scottw (Aug 21, 2020)

Camera development takes time. This rumored spec list looks like a direct response to the Fujifilm X-T2 and later models. This feels like the strongest reason Canon would actually make a camera like this besides wanting to make an actual upgrade to the M5.

The main thing I'm wanting right now is a physically larger and higher quality viewfinder compared to the one in the M5 and M50. I've gotten into using old film era glass, so the EVF on the M5 and M50 do feel a bit lacking compared to what else is out there.

Comments on rumored specs:

I do want dual card slots. I miss having that feature from when I used Nikon DSLRs. Given how Canon has handled dual slots on the R5/R6 we can't expect duplication of video files, which is a bit disappointing, but duplication of photos would be great at least.
IBIS... great. Definitely a nice addition. Helpful with current EF-M glass that tends to be on the slower end.
DPAF II... also great. Better AF is always nice. Hopefully they come in with new lenses to go along with even faster AF compared to the M6 Mark II.
12 fps? Seems odd if the M6 Mark II is rated 14 max. 
4k60 and 1080p120 seem good at face value, but I'm not expecting much given Canon's latest situation with the R5/R6 and what the M6 Mark II can do. CLog would be nice too, but another wait and see. downsampled and 10-bit would be things to cause overheating due to added data requirements.


----------



## FilipDP (Aug 21, 2020)

Skux said:


> A high end EOS M, as much as I want one, is rather pointless without high end M lenses.


Canon should do the RF trick with the M series as well. First bring out some good glass, the good camera's.


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 21, 2020)

To change the subject, I'm not a vlogger and don't want to become one, but I have to wonder: using only Canon equipment, how would one construct a "perfect" vlogging camera? Maybe Canon sees the M cameras partly as their entries to the vlogging world, a world for which R cameras and lenses are just too big.


----------

