# Is a Canon EOS R100 coming next year? A budget EOS R APS-C camera [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 7, 2022)

> WIth the recent announcements for the highly-anticipated Canon EOS R7 and Canon EOS R10 along with new RF-S lenses, Canon has shown that they’re all-in on APS-C RF mount cameras.
> Are they done for now?
> It’s not likely, as the first rumors of a Canon EOS R100 have hit the web.  We do think a camera body under the Canon EOS R10 is very likely. We could also see it more closesly resemble the Canon EOS M50 Mark II or Canon EOS M6 Mark II in form factor.
> The EOS M lineup of cameras was designed by the PowerShot group within Canon, and with the PowerShot...



Continue reading...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2022)

EOS M is dead. Long live EOS M.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jun 7, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


I vote for the M6-2 form factor. I'd also appreciate it if Canon would offer a mount conversion service for my M mount lenses although the phrase "snowball's chance in Hell" comes to mind.


----------



## Atlasman (Jun 7, 2022)

I would buy an M6II type, but with 10-bit 4K DCI.


----------



## sanj (Jun 7, 2022)

So cool


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 7, 2022)

Not even a rumor from any source. Just speculation. Yes, many of us have been speculating that there will someday be a rebel in the RF lineup. It doesn't take too much intelligence or imagination to make such a speculation. But when Canon Rumors does it, people take it as fact and it becomes just another attempt to dissuade people from buying Canon M cameras.

CR won't be happy until M is dead. I'm sure Canon would be much happier if CR was dead.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 7, 2022)

Makes sense to unify the lines *if* Canon can hit the same price/size point that made the M successful.


----------



## TinTin (Jun 7, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> I vote for the M6-2 form factor. I'd also appreciate it if Canon would offer a mount conversion service for my M mount lenses although the phrase "snowball's chance in Hell" comes to mind.


Or possibly some sort of trade-in service, especially if EF-M lens optics get "re-born" in RF lens casings, allowing re-cycling of parts and a means of migrating EOS M users to the EOS R system. Trade-in your EF-M lens for a substantial discount on the equivalent RF lens.

To make sense, the discount would have to be more than the likely second-hand price, otherwise, if people could get a better price on online auctions, there would be no incentive to use it. The advantage for Canon would be that, by offering such a service, they would be taking these EF-M lenses out of circulation, making it harder for EOS M users to continue to obtain the parts which might keep them in the EOS M system.

Thinking about it, though, the administrative cost and other overheads might well outweigh the benefit Canon might reckon to gain, so I think "snowball's chance in Hell" could be right. I've no idea if there's any precedent in the camera market.


----------



## TinTin (Jun 7, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> Makes sense to unify the lines *if* Canon can hit the same price/size point that made the M successful.


I agree (I can't see any reason not to!), but, obviously, it does leave EOS M users "high and dry" (and possibly disgruntled with the brand).


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 7, 2022)

TinTin said:


> I agree (I can't see any reason not to!), but, obviously, it does leave EOS M users "high and dry" (and possibly disgruntled with the brand).


I suspect the typical EOS M user isn’t really interested in accumulating lenses and accessories and forward compatibility with future bodies. That’s for equipment geeks like us, who see the M as an accessory to our EF and RF EOS systems.


----------



## JustUs7 (Jun 7, 2022)

No more or less disgruntled than current DSLR users. Most M users aren’t on forums. Most use their cameras and when they don’t work anymore, they’ll see what’s new on the market and have maybe a kit lens and a prime to replace. But I expect our M6II will last for years before any of this becomes any kind of concern at my house. I also expect Canon will continue to service it if needed. Some of the hand wringing reads as though people think their M cameras will one day all just shut down for good overnight.


----------



## entoman (Jun 7, 2022)

If Canon are intent on killing off the M series (which I doubt, given their popularity and excellent design), then IMO they'd be making a big mistake. Why kill off an excellent product, only to replace it with something bulkier? Surely the whole point of the M series was to have a high quality *pocketable* MILC?


----------



## Kit Chan (Jun 7, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> I suspect the typical EOS M user isn’t really interested in accumulating lenses and accessories and forward compatibility with future bodies. That’s for equipment geeks like us, who see the M as an accessory to our EF and RF EOS systems.


EOS M user who is interested in accumulating lenses and accessories and would love a Digic X M6II successor here.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 7, 2022)

Kit Chan said:


> EOS M user who is interested in accumulating lenses and accessories and would love a Digic X M6II successor here.


I didn’t say there aren’t any, but the M is a consumer product. I’m willing to bet the vast majority of M users buy it like a toaster or any other appliance, to get a job done which is to take pictures they can’t get with their phones. Only a small minority, I would guess, hang out in internet photography equipment forums.

FWIW, I’m an M user too (M5), but I bought it as an accessory to my EF EOS system, for travel. These days, my son mainly uses it for astrophotography.


----------



## gregedwards69 (Jun 7, 2022)

TinTin said:


> Or possibly some sort of trade-in service, especially if EF-M lens optics get "re-born" in RF lens casings, allowing re-cycling of parts and a means of migrating EOS M users to the EOS R system. Trade-in your EF-M lens for a substantial discount on the equivalent RF lens.
> 
> To make sense, the discount would have to be more than the likely second-hand price, otherwise, if people could get a better price on online auctions, there would be no incentive to use it. The advantage for Canon would be that, by offering such a service, they would be taking these EF-M lenses out of circulation, making it harder for EOS M users to continue to obtain the parts which might keep them in the EOS M system.
> 
> Thinking about it, though, the administrative cost and other overheads might well outweigh the benefit Canon might reckon to gain, so I think "snowball's chance in Hell" could be right. I've no idea if there's any precedent in the camera market.


Indeed. It's a sad indictment of the throwaway world we live in. It would cost less to build new lenses than recycle common parts from old ones.


----------



## cayenne (Jun 7, 2022)

R1 Dammit.....R1!!

Enough of this cheap stuff.....get the real pro one out the door!!


----------



## entoman (Jun 7, 2022)

cayenne said:


> R1 Dammit.....R1!!
> 
> Enough of this cheap stuff.....get the real pro one out the door!!


I suspect that it's already being field tested and that only the firmware needs finalising.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jun 7, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> I vote for the M6-2 form factor. I'd also appreciate it if Canon would offer a mount conversion service for my M mount lenses although the phrase "snowball's chance in Hell" comes to mind.



The mount conversion service fee might cost more than the entire lens for the likes of 15-45 or 22mm


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 7, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> EOS M is dead. Long live EOS M.


Makes sense to go against Rumored Nikon Z30 (entry) - Z50 (mid) MK 1 and Sony's A5000 - A6000 bodies to get punters into system - entry level and god level of specs for £500 - £700


----------



## TinTin (Jun 7, 2022)

JustUs7 said:


> No more or less disgruntled than current DSLR users.


On the contrary, I think EOS M users have reason to be *more* disgruntled than DSLR users: DSLR users are able to adapt their EF and EF-S lenses to the RF system; EOS M users cannot adapt theirs, so their loss goes deeper, it seems to me.

I was under the impression that EOS M cameras (the M50 in particular) were popular with vloggers and YouTubers. So, potentially, a group of people with more influence than their number alone might suggest. Even if they have not invested in a range of lenses with potential use outside of vlogging, at some point they might want a new camera body and at that point, p*d off to discover they're having to replace more than just the camera, give full vent to their displeasure to all their admiring followers.


----------



## TinTin (Jun 7, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> Makes sense to go against Rumored Nikon Z30 (entry) - Z50 (mid) MK 1 and Sony's A5000 - A6000 bodies to get punters into system - entry level and god level of specs for £500 - £700


I'd like "god level of specs", too, for £500 - £700!  Or for even less. Who wouldn't!


----------



## entoman (Jun 7, 2022)

TinTin said:


> On the contrary, I think EOS M users have reason to be *more* disgruntled than DSLR users: DSLR users are able to adapt their EF and EF-S lenses to the RF system; EOS M users cannot adapt theirs, so their loss goes deeper, it seems to me.
> 
> I was under the impression that EOS M cameras (the M50 in particular) were popular with vloggers and YouTubers. So, potentially, a group of people with more influence than their number alone might suggest. Even if they have not invested in a range of lenses with potential use outside of vlogging, at some point they might want a new camera body and at that point, p*d off to discover they're having to replace more than just the camera, give full vent to their displeasure to all their admiring followers.


I'd bet that the vast majority of M purchasers, as mdcmdcmdc points out, are smartphone users or novices who don't own a DSLR or RF camera, and have no interest or intention of ever getting one. They are simply attracted by the styling, the Canon name, and the possibility of adding an extra lens to supplement the kit lens. They might be disappointed to find that the new super-duper RF10 and the imaginary RF100 are less pocketable than the M models.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Jun 7, 2022)

Aren't there many more things in life to be disgruntled about than the status of the M system? 

So much heat and shade being thrown around for a system regularly dismissed by the majority of the forum over the years. 

If Canon brings anything new out, there's unhappiness, if Canon sits on its hands and releases nothing, there's unhappiness.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> If Canon brings anything new out, there's unhappiness, if Canon sits on its hands and releases nothing, there's unhappiness.


If Canon doesn't bring out the camera I specifically want, with each and every bell I want and not a single whistle I don't want, there's unhappiness.


----------



## derrald (Jun 7, 2022)

Every year I go on a multi-day backcountry hiking trip. Early on I carried a 5D Mark II, then a 5DsR with a telephoto, macro, and a wide angle lens. As I got older I wanted my weight down, but I didn't want to compromise quality. I eventually went with a SL1 which created some saleable images for me, but I hated the noise at higher ISOs. 

I resisted going in on the M series for quite some time because I felt that Canon just didn't offer the lens lineup I needed. Finally, I went in on an M5 just because every ounce counts when hiking. I picked up the 11-22, 18-150, 55-200. The 11-22 is pretty good, I'm not really a fan of the others. My biggest use case for my cameras is landscape so the wider the better. I got pretty good at stitching M5 images while the camera was balanced on a trekking pole. Here is an example of that.









Mirror Lake Reflections - Scenic Landscape, Nature and Wildlife Photography


I wanted to choose a backcountry site that was more out of the way than during my previous trips to Rocky Mountain National Park. Mirror Lake is generally accessible from the far northwestern corner of the park which is a couple hour drive from Trail Ridge. From there it was about a 5-6 mile...



www.journeyoflight.com





I then found the Laowa 9mm and fell in love with wide angle all over again. I picked up the M6 II which I think is a very capable camera and so easy to pull out and capture images. In fact, I frequently have my 5DsR on a tripod with my 11-24 f/4l and I grab the M6 with the Laowa and capture better images because I'm unburdened by the weight.

While I like the R line, for me it's going backwards on the weight a tad. I know it's lighter and very capable (I own an R5 and have preordered an R7), but the M series had brought back a little of the fun for me. Plus it has the quality I need to create saleable images. If the M line dies, so be it, my M6 II and Laowa will continue to function regardless. With that being said, I personally would love to see the M series continue in some form. 

In the end, if I have to choose water over a camera, I'll choose water every time. The M series just enabled me to have a camera and still go quite a distance on my hikes while capturing some memorable images.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 7, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> If Canon doesn't bring out the camera I specifically want, with each and every bell I want and not a single whistle I don't want, there's unhappiness.


We don’t want much, just an R1 for under $2000.


----------



## TinTin (Jun 7, 2022)

@derrald: Beautiful images, and a touching write-up expressing the affection that EOS M users feel for these little cameras.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 7, 2022)

Like @Czardoom I get a little tired of these closed-loop rumors that simply repost unsubstantiated rumors from other sites. I guess it is too much to expect that anyone is going to practice actual journalism and do some research to sort out the facts from fiction. Much easier and more profitable to just post clickbait.

As for the substance of the rumor I am in the skeptical category. I doubt that consolidating everything into a single mount will really save Canon much if anything. Those who buy the M system because of its size are unlikely to ever be pleased with the size of a R body. And, I wonder why Canon even needs to have cheap R crop sensor bodies, when they've shown with the RP that full frame can be affordable as well. It seems to me that releasing full frame R bodies in a range of lower costs would make more sense. It was possible during the film days with SLRs, why would it not be possible today with all the improvements in manufacturing efficiencies that have occurred since the 60s and 70s?


----------



## lote82 (Jun 7, 2022)

They said there will never be an APS-C camera with R mount.
Later they said there will never be an R camera with the form factor of an M camera.
I'm so curious with what they're coming up next!


----------



## GoldWing (Jun 7, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Canon is making a lot of low resolution cameras. They must have a ton of low resolution sensors in inventory or orders they were committed to. The Z9 revolution really caught Canon off guard.


----------



## mb66energy (Jun 7, 2022)

blackcoffee17 said:


> The mount conversion service fee might cost more than the entire lens for the likes of 15-45 or 22mm


Maybe but 200 bucks would be o.k. for the EF-M 32 which costs around 500 bucks.


----------



## H. Jones (Jun 7, 2022)

GoldWing said:


> Canon is making a lot of low resolution cameras. They must have a ton of low resolution sensors in inventory or orders they were committed to. The Z9 revolution really caught Canon off guard.


The "Z9 revolution"? Lol! I think you mean, Nikon's response to the R5's revolution. Canon was the one who shook up the industry by releasing a $3900 camera that shot 45 megapixels at 20 fps. Nikon was the one caught off guard, which is why the Z9 ended up at $5500, instead of $6500, to try to bridge the gap that was left by Canon's $3900 option.

The reality is that the *vast* majority of daily consumers do not need more than 24 megapixels. No one posting photos to Instagram or Facebook is worried about missing out on a 45mp sensor. Instagram's feed only even posts 1350x900p images. We're talking about what will probably be a $500 camera here. I really don't see a reason for the cheap end of cameras to get much more higher resolution anytime soon. The users, if anything, will be more annoyed by the large file sizes being sent to their phones more than they'd even know that they could crop them, and they probably aren't printing any larger than 8x10, if they're printing at all.


----------



## john1970 (Jun 7, 2022)

Is the R10 not entry level enough?


----------



## mb66energy (Jun 7, 2022)

derrald said:


> [...] I grab the M6 with the Laowa and capture better images because I'm unburdened by the weight. [...]


In my opinion a core remark: "unburdened".
I use two M50 ii for video (and photo) and I am impressed what they can do. I only need Full HD at the moment and like to have 15-85, 70-200, 60 macro, a self-made compact M/S mic and the bodies in a small photo back pack. (I am more the tele guy)
Technicolor style is a good substitute for some Log styles.

I wanted the C70 but this isn't for photo. The R5 C was the next "wanted" system including the XLR recording accessory but it's too expensive for a two body solution. So I preordered the R7 which might be compatible and is a good step into 4k I maybe need for further projects. Add some variable neutral density adapter and I am close to a C70 in achievable image quality + hopefully the TASCAM XLR accessory works for the R7. (and not only with some upcoming R7 C 

By the way: Great "unburdened" photographs!


----------



## AJ (Jun 7, 2022)

The question is: will the rumored R100 have an evf or not. My guess is that it won't.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2022)

GoldWing said:


> Canon is making a lot of low resolution cameras. They must have a ton of low resolution sensors in inventory or orders they were committed to. The Z9 revolution really caught Canon off guard.


A basic understanding of how large corporations handle competitive intelligence suggests that Canon was not caught off guard. 

I'm sure you weren't caught off guard, either, with your vast knowledge and understanding of the ILC market. Lol.


----------



## TinTin (Jun 7, 2022)

H. Jones said:


> The "Z9 revolution"? Lol! I think you mean, Nikon's response to the R5's revolution. Canon was the one who shook up the industry by releasing a $3900 camera that shot 45 megapixels at 20 fps. Nikon was the one caught off guard, which is why the Z9 ended up at $5500, instead of $6500, to try to bridge the gap that was left by Canon's $3900 option.
> 
> The reality is that the *vast* majority of daily consumers do not need more than 24 megapixels. No one posting photos to Instagram or Facebook is worried about missing out on a 45mp sensor. Instagram's feed only even posts 1350x900p images. We're talking about what will probably be a $500 camera here. I really don't see a reason for the cheap end of cameras to get much more higher resolution anytime soon. The users, if anything, will be more annoyed by the large file sizes being sent to their phones more than they'd even know that they could crop them, and they probably aren't printing any larger than 8x10, if they're printing at all.


Additionally, of course, we're talking here of cameras with 24 Mpx and 32 Mpx APS-C sensors, which are equivalent to taking a crop from the middle of 61 Mpx and 82 Mpx resolution Full Frame cameras respectively, so hardly "low resolution" at all! (And both higher than the Z9!)


----------



## Bob Howland (Jun 7, 2022)

derrald said:


> Every year I go on a multi-day backcountry hiking trip. Early on I carried a 5D Mark II, then a 5DsR with a telephoto, macro, and a wide angle lens. As I got older I wanted my weight down, but I didn't want to compromise quality. I eventually went with a SL1 which created some saleable images for me, but I hated the noise at higher ISOs.
> 
> I resisted going in on the M series for quite some time because I felt that Canon just didn't offer the lens lineup I needed. Finally, I went in on an M5 just because every ounce counts when hiking. I picked up the 11-22, 18-150, 55-200. The 11-22 is pretty good, I'm not really a fan of the others. My biggest use case for my cameras is landscape so the wider the better. I got pretty good at stitching M5 images while the camera was balanced on a trekking pole. Here is an example of that.
> 
> ...


You might want to try something from Olympus/OM. The sensor is smaller but some of the cameras border on the miniscule. As for water vs camera decision, been there, done that. The battle against weight is relentless.


----------



## bbasiaga (Jun 7, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> I vote for the M6-2 form factor. I'd also appreciate it if Canon would offer a mount conversion service for my M mount lenses although the phrase "snowball's chance in Hell" comes to mind.


There is at least a chance someone will make a teleconverter that will work to adapt them. 

Brian


----------



## masterpix (Jun 7, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


It was only expected that after the R7 and R10 which are replacements of the 7D and 90D, a 850D replacement will come out. This will be a complete replacement of the EF line. Canon will only need to generate more RFs lenses.


----------



## Curahee (Jun 7, 2022)

If there is an M form factor I would like some sort of viewfinder. Using the back screens is a real pain in the sun for me.


----------



## bergstrom (Jun 7, 2022)

For crying out loud, just make the RP2 already!


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jun 7, 2022)

For somebody like me, who hardly ever shoots moving subjects, the main advantage of mirrorless cameras is the IBIS. So all those cheap mirrorless cameras without any IBIS do not make sense for me. They have a lot of disadvantages compared to DSLRs like the lack of an OVF and high battery consumption.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 7, 2022)

john1970 said:


> Is the R10 not entry level enough?


R10 with kit lens: $1,099
M50 II with kit lens: $700


----------



## snapshot (Jun 7, 2022)

derrald said:


> Every year I go on a multi-day backcountry hiking trip. Early on I carried a 5D Mark II, then a 5DsR with a telephoto, macro, and a wide angle lens. As I got older I wanted my weight down, but I didn't want to compromise quality. I eventually went with a SL1 which created some saleable images for me, but I hated the noise at higher ISOs.
> 
> I resisted going in on the M series for quite some time because I felt that Canon just didn't offer the lens lineup I needed. Finally, I went in on an M5 just because every ounce counts when hiking. I picked up the 11-22, 18-150, 55-200. The 11-22 is pretty good, I'm not really a fan of the others. My biggest use case for my cameras is landscape so the wider the better. I got pretty good at stitching M5 images while the camera was balanced on a trekking pole. Here is an example of that.
> 
> ...


My daughter is currently using the sl1 + sigma 18-250 for her hiking photography. In strong daylight the images are quite good, however as you point out things get noisy as the evening comes. I have been wondering what the best thing to do for her is.
* sl2/sl3 - i think have a better sensor.
* m50 ii + ef adapter - she wants a view finder & hot shoe, so no m6 ii. also no ef-m lens competes in focal range
* r10 + adapter, might be similar to m50 ii, but with better auto focus?
* Fuji X-H2S + new lens, much more expensive but outside of EF system that I use and I am not sure she would care about rolling shutter.
Ideas?


----------



## t.linn (Jun 7, 2022)

I wouldn't blame EOS-M owners for being disgruntled but it seems fair to point out that there was reason to be skeptical about the system from the start, which is why people have been predicting the system's demise from the day it was introduced. It seemed intentionally limited to protect Canon's DSLR line—a typical Canon move. No one could look at the EOS-M lineup and reasonably believe that it was the future of Canon mirrorless once DSLRs sunsetted. Since its introduction, people who have bought into the system have vacillated between defiantly pointing out that the system isn't dead and blaming anyone who predicts its demise as the cause of it. The bottom line is that the elimination of EOS-M makes more sense now than it did the day it was introduced. I don't wish for it but I don't think anyone should be surprised if it happens—and good luck getting any compensation from Canon.

As an aside, it is an interesting and telling detail that EOS-M was designed by the PowerShot team. I hadn't read that before.


----------



## entoman (Jun 7, 2022)

AJ said:


> The question is: will the rumored R100 have an evf or not. My guess is that it won't.


It's rumoured to have either an EVF or not to have an EVF, just choose your favourite rumour and one of them might even happen! Or not.

inventarumour.com


----------



## derrald (Jun 7, 2022)

snapshot said:


> My daughter is currently using the sl1 + sigma 18-250 for her hiking photography. In strong daylight the images are quite good, however as you point out things get noisy as the evening comes. I have been wondering what the best thing to do for her is.
> * sl2/sl3 - i think have a better sensor.
> * m50 ii + ef adapter - she wants a view finder & hot shoe, so no m6 ii. also no ef-m lens competes in focal range
> * r10 + adapter, might be similar to m50 ii, but with better auto focus?
> ...


I guess if I were starting from near zero, but I had the sigma or the ability to borrow (or have lenses "gifted" from you when you upgrade!) EF lenses, I would personally go with R10 plus adapter. The R10 looks like a great camera and I thought about getting one, but since I'm getting the R7 I figured I'd see how the weight on that fairs first. Canon is seems to be all in on the R line now so it's probably ready for the future.

With all that being said, there are probably deals to be had on M cameras and EF lenses. I know I've seen some dumping their gear to move to RF. 

On a side note, my daughter's hiking kit is currently a 50D and an 18-200 ef-s lens. She takes it on day hikes, but it stays in the car for the backcountry treks. She's probably smarter than me in that regard!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> john1970 said:
> 
> 
> > Is the R10 not entry level enough?
> ...


M200 with kit lens: $549


----------



## dilbert (Jun 7, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> You might want to try something from Olympus/OM. The sensor is smaller but some of the cameras border on the miniscule. As for water vs camera decision, been there, done that. The battle against weight is relentless.



The lens options for Olympus aren't as good and the system is not price competitive.


----------



## mxwphoto (Jun 7, 2022)

Looking at the RF mount inner diameter, 54mm is only 7mm bigger than the 47mm of M mount. Canon can easily slap it on a M size body. I made a mock up of what it may look like below with accurate mount size depiction based on M6 II body. It's not quite as aesthetically pleasing as the M mount, but it works.

Moreover, I think a larger RF mount may actually be good for APSC as new lenses (not M ported ones) can break the 61mm lens diameter limit and go up to around 67mm while still keeping the lens barrel straight and maintaining the M lens design language which I like. It can also allow for brighter optics. (APSC 50mm f1.2 anyone?)

If the R100 turns out to be R10 without EVF for $750 I think that will check a lot of boxes for people.


----------



## dilbert (Jun 7, 2022)

t.linn said:


> I wouldn't blame EOS-M owners for being disgruntled but it seems fair to point out that there was reason to be skeptical about the system from the start, which is why people have been predicting the system's demise from the day it was introduced. It seemed intentionally limited to protect Canon's DSLR line—a typical Canon move. No one could look at the EOS-M lineup and reasonably believe that it was the future of Canon mirrorless once DSLRs sunsetted. Since its introduction, people who have bought into the system have vacillated between defiantly pointing out that the system isn't dead and blaming anyone who predicts its demise as the cause of it. The bottom line is that the elimination of EOS-M makes more sense now than it did the day it was introduced. I don't wish for it but I don't think anyone should be surprised if it happens—and good luck getting any compensation from Canon.
> 
> As an aside, it is an interesting and telling detail that EOS-M was designed by the PowerShot team. I hadn't read that before.



EOS-M has a total combined package size that is the most friendly for those hiking long treks and those who don't want the burden of a large camera while tourist sight seeing. The RF-s replacement (11-55) is not going to be smaller than the EF-M 11-22 however I can see a lot of tourists wanting a 11-55.


----------



## dilbert (Jun 7, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> Moreover, I think a larger RF mount may actually be good for APSC as new lenses (not M ported ones) can break the 61mm lens diameter limit and go up to around 67mm while still keeping the lens barrel straight and maintaining the M lens design language which I like. It can also allow for brighter optics. (APSC 50mm f1.2 anyone?)



People choosing EOS-M aren't doing so because they want big lenses with wide apertures.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 7, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> Makes sense to unify the lines *if* Canon can hit the same price/size point that made the M successful.


Its not merely price point. The M6 mk 2 fits and calibrates perfectly on the new portable gimbals without the problem of protruding EFVs slamming into gimbals during alignment. Those that never use gimbals and create content this way simply dont get that. Canon does. The reason that they took the time to squash CR once again.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 7, 2022)

t.linn said:


> I wouldn't blame EOS-M owners for being disgruntled but it seems fair to point out that there was reason to be skeptical about the system from the start, which is why people have been predicting the system's demise from the day it was introduced. It seemed intentionally limited to protect Canon's DSLR line—a typical Canon move. No one could look at the EOS-M lineup and reasonably believe that it was the future of Canon mirrorless once DSLRs sunsetted. Since its introduction, people who have bought into the system have vacillated between defiantly pointing out that the system isn't dead and blaming anyone who predicts its demise as the cause of it. The bottom line is that the elimination of EOS-M makes more sense now than it did the day it was introduced. I don't wish for it but I don't think anyone should be surprised if it happens—and good luck getting any compensation from Canon.
> 
> As an aside, it is an interesting and telling detail that EOS-M was designed by the PowerShot team. I hadn't read that before.


Another zealot that Canon has face palmed more than once for nearly a decade. The bottom line is that Canon has no intention of ending the M series. No body cares about "compensation". Same whining from non mobile creators that we have listened to for nearly a decade now. I wouldnt go believing the same crap CR has been writing for nearly ten years now. Simply BS.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 7, 2022)

Another CR attempt at the same recycled rumor. You are a year ahead of yourself. The R10 was supposedly the "


TinTin said:


> On the contrary, I think EOS M users have reason to be *more* disgruntled than DSLR users: DSLR users are able to adapt their EF and EF-S lenses to the RF system; EOS M users cannot adapt theirs, so their loss goes deeper, it seems to me.
> 
> I was under the impression that EOS M cameras (the M50 in particular) were popular with vloggers and YouTubers. So, potentially, a group of people with more influence than their number alone might suggest. Even if they have not invested in a range of lenses with potential use outside of vlogging, at some point they might want a new camera body and at that point, p*d off to discover they're having to replace more than just the camera, give full vent to their displeasure to all their admiring followers.


Eos M users dont need to adapt anything. There are plenty of 3rd party lenses. Guess you didnt get Canon's latest face palm to CR. They have no intention of ending the M series any time soon. This year or next year. You may even expect a new M series camera in 2023


----------



## reefroamer (Jun 7, 2022)

TinTin said:


> On the contrary, I think EOS M users have reason to be *more* disgruntled than DSLR users: DSLR users are able to adapt their EF and EF-S lenses to the RF system; EOS M users cannot adapt theirs, so their loss goes deeper, it seems to me.
> 
> I was under the impression that EOS M cameras (the M50 in particular) were popular with vloggers and YouTubers. So, potentially, a group of people with more influence than their number alone might suggest. Even if they have not invested in a range of lenses with potential use outside of vlogging, at some point they might want a new camera body and at that point, p*d off to discover they're having to replace more than just the camera, give full vent to their displeasure to all their admiring followers.


The M lenses have never been adaptable to anything, nor did Canon ever even imply such. Anyone who has ever bought into the EOSM system (me included) thinking they could adapt their M lenses to other Canon bodies now or in the future either didn’t care or was not paying attention. The only adaptation has always been via an adapter for the M bodies that let them use the EF and EFS lenses. The EOSM system has stood alone since Day 1, and done that quite successfully. I don’t think that’s going to change.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 7, 2022)

Canon will more than likely release another M series this fall. Much to the dissapointment of another CR decade long campaign. CR is most widely known as the M series haters at this point. Quite obviously envious of the young content creator market that they just cant seem to peg.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jun 7, 2022)

AJ said:


> The question is: will the rumored R100 have an evf or not. My guess is that it won't.


If the R100 has a EVF, than there will be a R1000 without.
I really think, there will be the tinyest possible "box" camera like the old EOS M1 without anything. I don't follow the M line, know now there was a M6-2 too, and I am wondering because this is also 400g. I think it can be a lot lighter "today". A mobile phone weights about 150g and has also a big screen on it and a high performance processor. Yes, no "big" sensor, but I think 200-250g must be possible today, if they really want it. But yeah, maybe it is impractible even if u use only a M22mm (as RF) prime...


----------



## jam05 (Jun 7, 2022)

reefroamer said:


> The M lenses have never been adaptable to anything, nor did Canon ever even imply such. Anyone who has ever bought into the EOSM system (me included) thinking they could adapt their M lenses to other Canon bodies now or in the future either didn’t care or was not paying attention. The only adaptation has always been via an adapter for the M bodies that let them use the EF and EFS lenses. The EOSM system has stood alone since Day 1, and done that quite successfully. I don’t think that’s going to change.


Yeah, nobody needs to adapt. There are other manufacturers that produce excellent M series lenses. Canon doesnt mind, neither did Sony when they released their mirrorless cameras with only about 3 lenses for nearly five years.


----------



## reefroamer (Jun 7, 2022)

GoldWing said:


> Canon is making a lot of low resolution cameras. They must have a ton of low resolution sensors in inventory or orders they were committed to. The Z9 revolution really caught Canon off guard.


Canon will probably sell a lot more R10s than Nikon will sell Z9s. Based on price alone.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 7, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> EOS M is dead. Long live EOS M.


Things look bleak, but a [CR1] rumor never killed anything. It's just a rumor created by a "_unknown or anonymous source". _


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> CR won't be happy until M is dead.


I do find it interesting that when the M6 II was discontinued in two countries (it's still widely available globally), it made front page news here on CR:








Canon has discontinued the Canon EOS M6 Mark II


We have received reports from two different countries that the Canon EOS M6 Mark II has been discontinued. There will obviously be inventory in various stores a



www.canonrumors.com





However, when a Canon regional CEO (for China, so not a small region) stated in an interview that, "The EOS M Series accounts for about 30% of Canon’s total camera sales...it is unlikely that the M series will not be upgraded in the future," the CR home page didn't mention it.

I'm not a fan of biased reporting, from any source.



John Wilde said:


> Things look bleak, but a [CR1] rumor never killed anything. It's just a rumor created by a "_unknown or anonymous source". _


Given that a senior Canon exec said a future upgrade to the M series is likely, it's not bleak at all.

Having said that, I can certainly see Canon pushing the M series even more toward the consumer side, i.e., we see updates to the M200 and M50, but no M5II or M6III.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Jun 7, 2022)

derrald said:


> Every year I go on a multi-day backcountry hiking trip. Early on I carried a 5D Mark II, then a 5DsR with a telephoto, macro, and a wide angle lens. As I got older I wanted my weight down, but I didn't want to compromise quality. I eventually went with a SL1 which created some saleable images for me, but I hated the noise at higher ISOs.
> 
> I resisted going in on the M series for quite some time because I felt that Canon just didn't offer the lens lineup I needed. Finally, I went in on an M5 just because every ounce counts when hiking. I picked up the 11-22, 18-150, 55-200. The 11-22 is pretty good, I'm not really a fan of the others. My biggest use case for my cameras is landscape so the wider the better. I got pretty good at stitching M5 images while the camera was balanced on a trekking pole. Here is an example of that.
> 
> ...


"While I like the R line, for me it's going backwards on the weight a tad. I know it's lighter and very capable (I own an R5 and have preordered an R7), but the M series had brought back a little of the fun for me. Plus it has the quality I need to create saleable images. If the M line dies, so be it, my M6 II and Laowa will continue to function regardless. With that being said, I personally would love to see the M series continue in some form."

This.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 7, 2022)

john1970 said:


> Is the R10 not entry level enough?





John Wilde said:


> R10 with kit lens: $1,099
> M50 II with kit lens: $700





neuroanatomist said:


> M200 with kit lens: $549


T7 with kit lens: $479

Just illustrating that for price conscious consumers, the Rebel DSLRs remain the best option. Canon will decide the fate of both formats based on sales and whether or not they believe they can transition people to the R mount. Right now, both represent too large of a market for Canon to arbitrarily kill off either one.


----------



## entoman (Jun 7, 2022)

t.linn said:


> I wouldn't blame EOS-M owners for being disgruntled but it seems fair to point out that there was reason to be skeptical about the system from the start, which is why people have been predicting the system's demise from the day it was introduced. It seemed intentionally limited to protect Canon's DSLR line—a typical Canon move.


Do you really believe that? It seems to me that the target audience for comparably priced DSLRs (Rebels) is and has always been a completely different group of people, so there has been no need to protect one from the other.

A generalisation I know, and there are definitely exceptions, but I would have thought that the majority of M buyers primarily wanted a stylish, compact *pocketable* camera; whereas the majority of Rebel buyers are probably of an older generation, many brought up on film SLRs, and happy to use a larger and less fashionable DSLR.

Rebel buyers also differ in that they want access to a much wider range of lenses - they may only have one or two lenses, but those could be optics such as macros or long telezooms that Canon never intended to be put on a little M.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2022)

unfocused said:


> T7 with kit lens: $479
> 
> Just illustrating that for price conscious consumers, the Rebel DSLRs remain the best option. Canon will decide the fate of both formats based on sales and whether or not they believe they can transition people to the R mount. Right now, both represent too large of a market for Canon to arbitrarily kill off either one.


Which is why, in the interview I linked above, the same exec stated that DSLRs comprise *40%* of Canon’s total camera sales.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 7, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> However, when a Canon regional CEO (for China, so not a small region) stated in an interview that, "The EOS M Series accounts for about 30% of Canon’s total camera sales...it is unlikely that the M series will not be upgraded in the future," the CR home page didn't mention it.


Very interesting. Thanks for posting that link!


----------



## AlanF (Jun 7, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> I do find it interesting that when the M6 II was discontinued in two countries (it's still widely available globally), it made front page news here on CR:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting that in the interview he said that the R7 and R10 are not aimed at young people so it is good Canon is catering for us oldies!


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 7, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> R10 with kit lens: $1,099
> M50 II with kit lens: $700


The obvious way to reduce the cost is to remove the EVF a la M200... even if it doesn't hit the M200 price point


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 7, 2022)

unfocused said:


> Like @Czardoom I get a little tired of these closed-loop rumors that simply repost unsubstantiated rumors from other sites. I guess it is too much to expect that anyone is going to practice actual journalism and do some research to sort out the facts from fiction. Much easier and more profitable to just post clickbait.


It is CR1 so feel free to speculate.. at least the post had a rating this time. 
"practise actual journalism" in a rumours site? If so, then the spelling and grammar quality should be improved!
There have been purely speculative posts in the past to drum up some interest and fantasy specs


----------



## Bob Howland (Jun 7, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


One thing that has always puzzled me is why, if small M-system size is so important, Canon never seemed to optimize the m-system for vloggers. For one thing, I've always expected a 15 f/2 lens from Canon.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 8, 2022)

I think we’ll end up seeing the full range of cameras in RF mount the same as it was with EF. Canons EF mount ecosystem did eeeeeextremely well.. and it if ain’t broke..


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 8, 2022)

t.linn said:


> I wouldn't blame EOS-M owners for being disgruntled but it seems fair to point out that there was reason to be skeptical about the system from the start, which is why people have been predicting the system's demise from the day it was introduced. It seemed intentionally limited to protect Canon's DSLR line—a typical Canon move. No one could look at the EOS-M lineup and reasonably believe that it was the future of Canon mirrorless once DSLRs sunsetted. Since its introduction, people who have bought into the system have vacillated between defiantly pointing out that the system isn't dead and blaming anyone who predicts its demise as the cause of it. The bottom line is that the elimination of EOS-M makes more sense now than it did the day it was introduced. I don't wish for it but I don't think anyone should be surprised if it happens—and good luck getting any compensation from Canon.
> 
> As an aside, it is an interesting and telling detail that EOS-M was designed by the PowerShot team. I hadn't read that before.


The EOS M was never intended to be "the future of Canon mirrorless once DSLRs sunsetted" or any such lofty market-speak. For one thing, the EOS M was and is a consumer product, generally not aimed at the type of people who like to hang out in internet photography forums talking about its future direction. The characteristics you mention are only of consequence to photo equipment enthusiasts who buy M bodies to supplement their EF and R system, not non-photo enthusiast consumers.

In my view, the EOS M was Canon's effort to "get their feet wet" in mirrorless. Canon recognized that Sony and Panasonic were doing gangbuster business in compact mirrorless ILC's, so the M was an attempt to address that marketplace and learn about mirrorless cameras and the marketplace in the real world in a low-risk and low-visibility way, before bringing it to their main enthusiast and professional EOS line. Had they not done the M first and gone straight to the R, things might not have gone so smoothly for either Canon or their customers.

The only people who are disgruntled are those who believe an M body should be an R6 at 1/4 the price.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 8, 2022)

JustUs7 said:


> No more or less disgruntled than current DSLR users. Most M users aren’t on forums. Most use their cameras and when they don’t work anymore, they’ll see what’s new on the market and have maybe a kit lens and a prime to replace. But I expect our M6II will last for years before any of this becomes any kind of concern at my house. I also expect Canon will continue to service it if needed. Some of the hand wringing reads as though people think their M cameras will one day all just shut down for good overnight.


The M6ii has been discontinued in a couple of markets. Australia is probably not a significant market but Japan has also discontinued as per
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...ed-the-canon-eos-m6-mark-ii.41422/post-931262
and
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...ed-the-canon-eos-m6-mark-ii.41422/post-931367
Clearly the cameras will continue to work for many years to come.
Note that the M6ii was the only canon APS-c that had the most pixels on duck aka reach with 14fps. The ergonomics weren't great with EF big whites though
The M6ii is the closest model to the R7/10 though


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 8, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> I do find it interesting that when the M6 II was discontinued in two countries (it's still widely available globally), it made front page news here on CR:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


From the interview (thanks for posting), it isn't clear if the Canon exec is talking from a global sales level or only his market ie China. Is also isn't clear if he is talking from sales units or sales revenue.

Canon China will have a different sales picture than most developed countries. We can debate China's "developing" status wrt WTO separately but generally middle class incomes range from USD7,250 to USD62,500 (RMB 60,000 to 500,000) per year. Middle class defined defined as spending USD10-50/day and represents >700 million people. Lower income would not be consumers of photographs or camera buyers except for camera phones.

I wish that forums would utilise the language skills of its members to translate better than google translate as the subtleties are lost which can be important... or at least confirm the overall messages.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 8, 2022)

Personally, a RPii would be of more interest. It is 3 years old now and used the spare parts bin (6 year old 6Dii sensor) that was perfect at the time but looking dated now except for the price.
Removing the EVF in particular would mean an easy choice to have a backup R mount body that handles wide angle lenses.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> From the interview (thanks for posting), it isn't clear if the Canon exec is talking from a global sales level or only his market ie China. Is also isn't clear if he is talking from sales units or sales revenue.
> 
> Canon China will have a different sales picture than most developed countries. We can debate China's "developing" status wrt WTO separately but generally middle class incomes range from USD7,250 to USD62,500 (RMB 60,000 to 500,000) per year. Middle class defined defined as spending USD10-50/day and represents >700 million people. Lower income would not be consumers of photographs or camera buyers except for camera phones.
> 
> I wish that forums would utilise the language skills of its members to translate better than google translate as the subtleties are lost which can be important... or at least confirm the overall messages.


I believe the reference to, “Canon’s total camera sales,” means all of Canon globally and is about unit sales. That’s consistent with the CIPA data on DSLR vs. MILC units, manufacturer market share, and Canon’s financial reports. In other words, Canon publishes their ILC unit sales, CIPA publishes ILC units shipped across all manufacturers broken down by DSLR vs. MILC, Canon and Nikon are the only two major DSLR makers, and from those numbers it can be deduced that about 40% of Canon’s global unit ILCs sales are DSLRs, which is the figure given in the interview.

I previously estimated DSLRs as a bit less than 50% of Canon’s ILC sales, whereas the exec is talking about total camera sales (20% R, 30% M, 40% DSLR, and thus 10% P&S).


----------



## chasingrealness (Jun 8, 2022)

Well, “100” obviously stands for 100MP so this must be the pixel monster we have all been waiting for. A 100MP crop sensor camera with a FF equivalent of 256MP in a body the size of an M50.


----------



## SnowMiku (Jun 8, 2022)

14fps sounds good for an R100, but it will probably come with a small buffer you can only use for a second. I'd be happy for a slower option say 7fps or so and get more time. I say keep the viewfinder on the R100 because for me the viewfinder is easier to use for wildlife but can understand if they removed it due to cost.

I am not disgruntled about the M series and I own an M5 with the 18-150mm. If the M5 dies I'll either get it fixed or buy another M camera used, or if an R100 comes out by then I could always sell the EF-M 18-150mm and buy the RF-S equivalent.


----------



## sanj (Jun 8, 2022)

It seems Canon thinks it can compete with smartphones.


----------



## Bahrd (Jun 8, 2022)

lote82 said:


> They said there will never be an APS-C camera with R mount.
> Later they said there will never be an R camera with the form factor of an M camera.
> I'm so curious with what they're coming up next!


There will never be an R camera at the M price level.
Your welcome!
Ɑ : : D


----------



## koenkooi (Jun 8, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> The M6ii has been discontinued in a couple of markets. Australia is probably not a significant market but Japan has also discontinued as per
> https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...ed-the-canon-eos-m6-mark-ii.41422/post-931262
> and
> https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...ed-the-canon-eos-m6-mark-ii.41422/post-931367
> ...


I used the M6II + (rented) 100-400L II for a while with a smallrig cage to make the grip a bit bigger. It worked well enough for reach and image quality, but the ergonomics weren't great. But much better AF, FPS and pixels-per-dragonfly than the RP.




I bought the RF100-500mm, which is a bit lighter, but feels a lot lighter and I wonder how that would handle on a tiny RF body.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

Bahrd said:


> There will never be an R camera at the M price level.
> Your welcome!
> Ɑ : : D


Thank you!
But I think the R10 is already on M6 II price level. And an assuming R100 will be on M50 II price level.
Next one please!


----------



## bf (Jun 8, 2022)

Kit Chan said:


> EOS M user who is interested in accumulating lenses and accessories and would love a Digic X M6II successor here.


+1


----------



## bf (Jun 8, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> Looking at the RF mount inner diameter, 54mm is only 7mm bigger than the 47mm of M mount. Canon can easily slap it on a M size body. I made a mock up of what it may look like below with accurate mount size depiction based on M6 II body. It's not quite as aesthetically pleasing as the M mount, but it works.
> 
> Moreover, I think a larger RF mount may actually be good for APSC as new lenses (not M ported ones) can break the 61mm lens diameter limit and go up to around 67mm while still keeping the lens barrel straight and maintaining the M lens design language which I like. It can also allow for brighter optics. (APSC 50mm f1.2 anyone?)
> 
> ...


That's actually a good example why it will never work!


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

bf said:


> +1


-1 
There is already the R10.


----------



## bf (Jun 8, 2022)

lote82 said:


> -1
> There is already the R10.


Is R10 +30MP or range finder style or has an ef-m mount optimized for an APSC sensor?
Or, are you a m6 mk ii user?


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

No, I am a R7 user from the FUTURE ... if you want 30mp and Digic X, take the R7.

The R10 has quite exactly the same price level as the M6 II. What does this show to you?
Do you really think Canon would bring out a second APS-C camera with exactly the same price level as the NEW R10?!


----------



## bf (Jun 8, 2022)

lote82 said:


> No, I am a R7 user from the FUTURE ... if you want 30mp and Digic X, take the R7.
> 
> The R10 has quite exactly the same price level as the M6 II. What does this show to you?
> Do you really think Canon would bring out a second APS-C camera with exactly the same price level as the NEW R10?!


What it shows is to me is you are looking from your limited perspective rather than an EF-M user's perspective like the OP whom I +1d.

Just be happy with your R7!


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> Not even a rumor from any source. Just speculation. Yes, many of us have been speculating that there will someday be a rebel in the RF lineup. It doesn't take too much intelligence or imagination to make such a speculation. But when Canon Rumors does it, people take it as fact and it becomes just another attempt to dissuade people from buying Canon M cameras.
> 
> CR won't be happy until M is dead. I'm sure Canon would be much happier if CR was dead.


So much arrogance, ignorance and stupidity in one comment!

People like you were constantly claiming that there will never be APS-C cameras in the RF system. 
Now that CR once more has proven that he was right with his rumors, you should rather look at your own "intelligence or imagination". 
Pathetic!

By the way, I think canonwatch was first with the R100 rumor. 

M is already dead. CR is doing fine. 
If you already know what Canon wants, what exactly are you doing here?!


----------



## dilbert (Jun 8, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> The M6ii has been discontinued in a couple of markets. Australia is probably not a significant market but Japan has also discontinued as per



Easy test, visit Canon's Australian website:









Mirrorless Cameras | EOS M and EOS R Range


You'll love the outstanding features of these lightweight mirrorless cameras to help you master all aspects of your photography.




www.canon.com.au





and you can find the M6 Mark II with a 'Buy' button.

Doesn't look very discontinued to me.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 8, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Personally, a RPii would be of more interest. It is 3 years old now and used the spare parts bin (6 year old 6Dii sensor) that was perfect at the time but looking dated now except for the price.
> Removing the EVF in particular would mean an easy choice to have a backup R mount body that handles wide angle lenses.


No, no !! The RP is a delightful, small and light FF camera with excellent ergonomics as it is, which very much includes the viewfinder. By all means have a model under the RP to be simpler, cheaper and no EVF, but keep the current RP’s position; small and light, pretty well spec’d and competent, with EVF.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 8, 2022)

dilbert said:


> Easy test, visit Canon's Australian website:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep, and when you click on buy, no retailers appear. No Canon resellers in Australia stock it when I last checked them all


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 8, 2022)

lote82 said:


> People like you were constantly claiming that there will never be APS-C cameras in the RF system.


CR rumored about an APS-C R in 2018, and it was announced in 2022. I guess that means an R100 will be announced in 2026.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 8, 2022)

Sporgon said:


> No, no !! The RP is a delightful, small and light FF camera with excellent ergonomics as it is, which very much includes the viewfinder. By all means have a model under the RP to be simpler, cheaper and no EVF, but keep the current RP’s position; small and light, pretty well spec’d and competent, with EVF.


I have no issues with the RP. I just want a cheap r mount body that handles all RF lenses and adapted EF lenses as a backup. Hopefully with a better sensor than the RP. speed/fps/video would be secondary for the mostly landscape work that I would be doing when traveling and needing a backup.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 8, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> I used the M6II + (rented) 100-400L II for a while with a smallrig cage to make the grip a bit bigger. It worked well enough for reach and image quality, but the ergonomics weren't great. But much better AF, FPS and pixels-per-dragonfly than the RP.
> 
> I bought the RF100-500mm, which is a bit lighter, but feels a lot lighter and I wonder how that would handle on a tiny RF body.


My main issue is that the M series doesn't support RF lenses and the APS-c R bodies don't handle wide angles or at least with my lenses.
I can manage a small body if in a backup situation even with the RF100-500mm but certainly prefer my R5 size (or larger) given that I have large hands.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> CR rumored about an APS-C R in 2018, and it was announced in 2022. I guess that means an R100 will be announced in 2026.


Well, at least late is closer than "will never be"!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> CR rumored about an APS-C R in 2018, and it was announced in 2022. I guess that means an R100 will be announced in 2026.


Yep. Rumors of the M series' demise have also been circulated. Funny how some people swallow those rumors like candy even though Canon has publicly stated the opposite.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yep. Rumors of the M series' demise have also been circulated. Funny how some people swallow those rumors like candy even though Canon has publicly stated the opposite.


Words:
"We would like to listen to the requests of our customers and provide the M series as long as there is demand."

Deeds:
- M6 II is fading out (at least in some countries)
- R10 is selling at the same price level as the (out fading) M6 II
- R100 is rumored (NOT ONLY by CR) to come 

If you prefer words ... I prefer deeds!


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 8, 2022)

lote82 said:


> - R100 is rumored (NOT ONLY by CR) to come


CanonRumors cites CanonWatch as the source of the rumor.

"Take it with a grain of salt. The source of the rumor is not very reliable." -CanonWatch


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

Thank you ... I didn't see!

By the way ... CanonWatch is not only known for being not very reliable but also for being quite skeptical about the end of the M system!

VERY strange that especially they come up with this rumor, isn't it?!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> CanonRumors cites CanonWatch as the source of the rumor.
> 
> "Take it with a grain of salt. The source of the rumor is not very reliable." -CanonWatch


That's what happens on slow news days, one site posts an unreliable rumor and other rumor sites reblog it. Then gullible people see it on several sites and assume it must be true because it's somehow 'confirmed' by more than one site.

As was pointed out by @Czardoom, once the existence of APS-C RF bodies was known a forthcoming 'Rebel/xxxD body' became pretty much inevitable. But it may be a while – well over half the cameras Canon sells are entry-level DSLRs and M-series bodies. The R10 is well above the price point for those cameras. As long as Canon can continue selling those low-end bodies where the development costs have been recouped and profit margins are correspondingly higher, they'll keep selling them. 

According to BCN, last month the top 5 best-selling ILCs in Japan comprised two Canon M-series kits and two Canon DSLR kits, along with an Old m4/3 camera. Those Canon cameras have in the top 10 for over two years, almost always with two or three of them being the among top 3 best-sellers every month.


----------



## dilbert (Jun 8, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Yep, and when you click on buy, no retailers appear. No Canon resellers in Australia stock it when I last checked them all



back at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, when there was no toilet paper on supermarket shelves, would you have said that toilet paper was discontinued?

Not that it matters, but the M50-II and the M200 are still available.

Maybe the M6-II just didn't sell well (and is EOL) beause it was too expensive for what it is - Canon went a long way upmarket with the M6-II (compared to the M6), in what I consider a gamble or test of the market's desire for that price point, etc. Maybe it didn't pay off.

What's necessary is to find an online current catalogue of Canon cameras and lenses, something newer than this: https://pdf.directindustry.com/pdf/canon-usa/eos/30082-926688-_10.html

While this (https://pdf.directindustry.com/pdf/canon-usa-30082.html) doesn't include the EOS--M, it does include the 7D Mark II and that is discontinued.

India's catalogue here (https://in.canon/en/consumer/web/camera-catalogue) includes R3, R5, R6, M50, M50-II.


----------



## takesome1 (Jun 8, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> As long as Canon can continue selling those low-end bodies where the development costs have been recouped and profit margins are correspondingly higher, they'll keep selling them.


It seems not all Canon owners agree with your assessment when it comes to the M.
But those that own Canon with the CAJ symbol I think will agree with your statement.


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 8, 2022)

lote82 said:


> So much arrogance, ignorance and stupidity in one comment!
> 
> People like you were constantly claiming that there will never be APS-C cameras in the RF system.
> Now that CR once more has proven that he was right with his rumors, you should rather look at your own "intelligence or imagination".
> ...


Since you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, let me clue you in.

I have always thought there would be RF APS-C cameras since the RF system was born and have said so repeatedly. So not sure what the heck you are talking about.

CR has been wrong about the M system for at least two years, if I am not mistaken, perhaps longer. So not sure what the heck you are talking about.

M acounts for 30% of Canon sales. So when you say "M is dead" you sure as heck don't know what you are talking about.

I have enough intelligence and imagination to know that constantly putting out rumors that a certain camera system is dead would be something Canon would not be happy about. The M system accounts for 30% of their sales. Do you really think that Canon is happy that at least some potential M buyers will not be buying their cameras because of these constant rumors that M is dead? 

You ask..."If you already know what Canon wants, what exactly are you doing here?!"

Just presenting facts and well thought opinions. What are you doing here? Obviously not that.


----------



## SteveC (Jun 8, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yep. Rumors of the M series' demise have also been circulated. Funny how some people swallow those rumors like candy even though Canon has publicly stated the opposite.



I can reliably confirm that the RFs will be dead by 2122.

Now, everyone who owns one is supposed to panic and dump their gear immediately due to its imminent demise.

And remember, you heard it here first.


----------



## bf (Jun 8, 2022)

I think Canon is prioritizing RF mount considering production issues and part shortages. In a pre-covid world, we would've had ef-m rf platforms at the same time. As for years, Canon offered M, SL, Rebel, and Prosumer DSLRs within a close price range and comparable sensors and processors for different needs.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> Just presenting facts and well thought opinions. What are you doing here? Obviously not that.


Obviously you don't know what facts are.


Czardoom said:


> Not even a rumor from any source. Just speculation.


CanonWatch is the source of the rumor. Calling it speculation doesn't change the fact, that it comes from a M friendly(!) source.


Czardoom said:


> CR won't be happy until M is dead. I'm sure Canon would be much happier if CR was dead.


Did Canon tell you this? Is this "well thought opinion" or "fact"? Why would they be happier? CR is best publicity they can get!


Czardoom said:


> I have always thought there would be RF APS-C cameras since the RF system was born and have said so repeatedly. So not sure what the heck you are talking about.


I want to apologize for this false statement of mine!


Czardoom said:


> CR has been wrong about the M system for at least two years, if I am not mistaken, perhaps longer. So not sure what the heck you are talking about.


CR can't be wrong about the M system because in the last two years there were no (at least I can't recall) rumors about the M system. For the last 3 years (or so) there weren't any new product developments (sorry, M50 II is not a new product hardwarewise) for the M system. That is exactly the problem ...

Let me tell you some facts:
- M6 II is fading out (at least in some countries)
- R10 is selling at the same price level as the (out fading) M6 II
- the rumored (by an M friendly source!) R100 will probably sell at the same price level as the M50 II

Do you really think Canon will produce quite exactly the same cameras (at least regarding the price level) for two different mounts?
I don't think you are that stupid!

Yes, some(!) M products still sell quite well in some(!) parts of the world. But as soon as the R10 and R7 are listed these sales will drop significantly.
Canon is milking a dead cow as long as people buy the old milk. Even if some people still enjoy the old milk doesn't mean the the cow (system) is alive.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 8, 2022)

lote82 said:


> But as soon as the R10 and R7 are listed these sales will drop significantly.


The R10 won't cause M50 sales to drop, because the two cameras are in completely different price categories.

R10 with kit lens: $1,099
M50 II with kit lens: $700


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> The R10 won't cause M50 sales to drop, because the two cameras are in completely different price categories.
> 
> R10 with kit lens: $1,099
> M50 II with kit lens: $700


Sadly, some people on this forum would not know a fact if it bit them on the behind. it’s hard to hear reason when your own opinion is thundering too loudly in your head.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> The R10 won't cause M50 sales to drop, because the two cameras are in completely different price categories.
> 
> R10 with kit lens: $1,099
> M50 II with kit lens: $700





lote82 said:


> Let me tell you some facts:
> - M6 II is fading out (at least in some countries)
> - R10 is selling at the same price level as the (out fading) M6 II
> - the rumored (by an M friendly source!) R100 will probably sell at the same price level as the M50 II


The assumed R100 (probably) will have the same price level as the M50. The R10 (and R7) will also make people jump ship even if they are more expensive than the M50 II.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 8, 2022)

xelaq said:


> Lote is the type of guy who will never be happy unless other people are unhappy.
> 
> 
> Are you talking about yourself? Just take your shitty 90D Mark II (aka R7 lol) and leave the people be.


Please tell me more about your unhappiness!


----------



## entoman (Jun 8, 2022)

lote82 said:


> You are obviously too stupid to read properly!
> 
> Really that hard?





xelaq said:


> Lote is the type of guy who will never be happy unless other people are unhappy.
> 
> 
> Are you talking about yourself? Just take your shitty 90D Mark II (aka R7 lol) and leave the people be.


Come on guys, we are here to exchange opinions about gear, NOT to exchange insults.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 8, 2022)

dilbert said:


> back at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, when there was no toilet paper on supermarket shelves, would you have said that toilet paper was discontinued?
> 
> Not that it matters, but the M50-II and the M200 are still available.
> 
> ...


My original assertion was the the M6ii was unavailable/discontinued in Australia. You said that wasn't true but bring up toilet paper as a relevant analogy when I point out that I was correct??
There were a couple of posts showing the the M6ii is also unavailable in Japan...
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/t...dget-eos-r-aps-c-camera-cr1.41505/post-935595

I never said that the rest of the M product line was unavailable/discontinued. I have no reasonable ideas why the M6ii is not available in Australia vs other countries.
I am not really following your points about what products are available in the US or India and how that is relevant to Australia.
You can still order a new 7Dii + kit lens on B&H. Clearly the 7Dii has been discontinued but you can still buy it (or at least one left on the shelf in the US).


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 9, 2022)

entoman said:


> Come on guys, we are here to exchange opinions about gear, NOT to exchange insults.


That's how you know the discussion has run its course, when it goes from speculation on the rumor and topic at hand to personal attacks.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 9, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> That's how you know the discussion has run its course, when it goes from speculation on the rumor and topic at hand to personal attacks.


And in only six pages!


----------



## jeanluc (Jun 9, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> I didn’t say there aren’t any, but the M is a consumer product. I’m willing to bet the vast majority of M users buy it like a toaster or any other appliance, to get a job done which is to take pictures they can’t get with their phones. Only a small minority, I would guess, hang out in internet photography equipment forums.
> 
> FWIW, I’m an M user too (M5), but I bought it as an accessory to my EF EOS system, for travel. These days, my son mainly uses it for astrophotography.


Me too. I have an R, R5 and 9 RF lenses. I bring my M5 and 2-3 lenses on family non photography trips to save space. It is still a great compact camera that IMO delivers very nice images. Can’t see any reason to replace it with a low end RF camera. If I am going to use RF glass, I’ll bring my R5.


----------



## Athomp2002 (Jun 9, 2022)

I wrote about the M-Lineup being done in 2020 and a lot of people with M-Cameras were mad and went off on me. I stated that it wouldn't make sense to support 3 lens lineups at the same time. They told me that the EF was going to be the one to go, and I said that is correct along with the M. you wouldn't believe how angry people were for me saying that lol. all good. They have to streamline the lineup and make sure that there is one mount moving forward. it's going to be important that all camera brands do this because of how sensitive the market can be at any given moment. I also think that the M-Series will make for a great novelty camera that people will end up paying above market value for in the future.


----------



## Skux (Jun 9, 2022)

EOS M may not be dead from a production standpoint but it has been dead from a development standpoint for a while. The last EF-M lens was released in 2018, and the last camera in 2019, with nothing on the horizon. The system is essentially complete, with a lens for every situation and all available to use on the excellent M6 Mark II.

Where would they possibly go next? The logical step would be to introduce R3-style subject tracking AF, but why would they do that when they'd rather sell you an RF camera and its expensive lenses?

Canon doesn't need to dump EOS M, nor do they need to continue developing it. Just leave it as it is, and keep making them until they stop selling.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2022)

entoman said:


> Come on guys, we are here to exchange opinions about gear, NOT to exchange insults.


While I agree, I also think anyone participating in an Internet forum discussion should have a thick skin. 

Personally, I also think it’s important to consider the source. If a young child at my kids’ school says something rude to me, I don’t get offended. I do feel sorry for the way they’ve been raised. I take the same approach with puerile adults.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 9, 2022)

Athomp2002 said:


> I wrote about the M-Lineup being done in 2020 and a lot of people with M-Cameras were mad and went off on me.* I stated that it wouldn't make sense to support 3 lens lineups at the same time. *They told me that the EF was going to be the one to go, and I said that is correct along with the M. you wouldn't believe how angry people were for me saying that lol. all good. They have to streamline the lineup and make sure that there is one mount moving forward. it's going to be important that all camera brands do this because of how sensitive the market can be at any given moment. I also think that the M-Series will make for a great novelty camera that people will end up paying above market value for in the future.


Well, at the time Canon was supporting 4 lens systems (EF/EF-S/M/RF). Now they are supporting 5 (EF/EF-S/M/RF/RF-S) so Canon seems comfortable to do so irrespective if it was illogical to you (or me). Some lenses have been discontinued but all mounts are still supported.

I don't think that most contributors would be angry at you for offering an opinion but would prefer if you state a case based on reasonable logic and available information. 
Of course, Canon will ignore all logic if they please.

I think that calling the M ecosystem a "novelty camera" is a little condescending for those who prefer a small pocketable system vs their bigger systems and not to mention those people whose disposable income doesn't extend to EF/RF systems.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2022)

jeanluc said:


> Me too. I have an R, R5 and 9 RF lenses. I bring my M5 and 2-3 lenses on family non photography trips to save space. It is still a great compact camera that IMO delivers very nice images. Can’t see any reason to replace it with a low end RF camera. If I am going to use RF glass, I’ll bring my R5.


On family trips, I often take both kits. The M6 and 2-3 lenses for daytime, touring around with the family, and the FF body (1D X / R3) for blue hour or nighttime solo outings for photography.

In that scenario, I can see a reason to replace it with a low-end RF camera and 2-3 RF-S lenses, to serve as a backup for the FF body. With the 1D X and EF lenses, a small/light adapter enabled my M6 to serve as a backup, albeit with the need to deal with narrower FoVs. But with RF lenses, the M6 can’t be a backup body.

Having said that, I have no plans to replace my M6 with an R10. Even if/when Canon replicates the EF-M lenses in RF-S housings, the R10 with an 11-22, 18-150 and 22/2 won't fit in a nice compact package like that M6 kit does (all of it goes easily in a Think Tank Mirrorless Mover 20).


----------



## Phenix205 (Jun 9, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> On family trips, I often take both kits. The M6 and 2-3 lenses for daytime, touring around with the family, and the FF body (1D X / R3) for blue hour or nighttime solo outings for photography.
> 
> In that scenario, I can see a reason to replace it with a low-end RF camera and 2-3 RF-S lenses, to serve as a backup for the FF body. With the 1D X and EF lenses, a small/light adapter enabled my M6 to serve as a backup, albeit with the need to deal with narrower FoVs. But with RF lenses, the M6 can’t be a backup body.
> 
> Having said that, I have no plans to replace my M6 with an R10. Even if/when Canon replicates the EF-M lenses in RF-S housings, the R10 with an 11-22, 18-150 and 22/2 won't fit in a nice compact package like that M6 kit does (all of it goes easily in a Think Tank Mirrorless Mover 20).


Similar experience here. Among the speculation that the M system may be dead, I almost bought a Fuji X-S10 last year while seeking a light weight compact system for travel and long distance hiking. But in the end decided to go with an M6II for compatibility with my EF lenses and existing EF-M lenses. 

During the spring break trip to Grand Canyon, Antelope Canyon, Bryce Canyon and Zion this April, I brought both M6II and 5DsR. During the day hikes with family, I only carried M6II plus 11-22 and 55-200. For sunset and sunrise solo photo trips, I used both but primarily the 5DsR with a couple of L lenses. The EF-M 55-200 is an OK lens but the images coming out of the 11-22 are fantastic, maybe not as crisp when compared to 5DsR side by side but more than enough for a large print on a wall of our house. For city walks, the 32 f1.4 and 22 f2 are just fabulous. With the light small system, I found I use the camera more. With the full frame beast, I often ended up using my iPhone more. The M6II is also nice for some action photos with the EF telephoto lenses except that the weight balance is not ideal. 

Not interested in R7/R10 at this time with current RF-S lens options. Maybe there is a slight chance for an M7? Probably just a wishful thinking.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 9, 2022)

Skux said:


> EOS M may not be dead from a production standpoint but it has been dead from a development standpoint for a while. The last EF-M lens was released in 2018, and the last camera in 2019, with nothing on the horizon. The system is essentially complete, with a lens for every situation and all available to use on the excellent M6 Mark II.
> 
> Where would they possibly go next? The logical step would be to introduce subject tracking AF, but why would they do that when they'd rather sell you an RF camera and its expensive lenses?
> 
> Canon doesn't need to dump EOS M, nor do they need to continue developing it. Just leave it as it is, and keep making them until they stop selling.


That is exactly what I was trying to say ... Thank you!

With my limited English and too much aggression I obviously failed to explain it in an appropriate way. I'm sorry for that.


----------



## koenkooi (Jun 9, 2022)

Skux said:


> EOS M may not be dead from a production standpoint but it has been dead from a development standpoint for a while. The last EF-M lens was released in 2018, and the last camera in 2019, with nothing on the horizon. The system is essentially complete, with a lens for every situation and all available to use on the excellent M6 Mark II.
> 
> Where would they possibly go next? [..]


Eye-AF in servo mode for non-M6II models. I think even the M50II lacks that. Another feature would be non-cropped 4k video. There are a lot of features in the "quality of life" category that haven't trickled down to the Mxxx models yet.

At 3 and 5yo now, my kids are slightly better at standing still for pictures, so eye-AF in servo mode is becoming less important for me. But I still need it for candids and action shots. I've been using the R5+100-500L for those, which works great, but goes from "camera in coat pocket" to "bring photo backpack" type of preparation. And being "that guy"


----------



## Bahrd (Jun 9, 2022)

Phenix205 said:


> During the spring break trip to Grand Canyon, Antelope Canyon, Bryce Canyon and Zion this April.


That's my plan for this October. And - if weather and fuel prices are merciful - also the Yellowstone and Grand Teton parks. 
Two cameras and lenses covering the 8-600mm range are ready. I will also take a mobile stuff: a drone, a smartphone. And, for really special occasions, a 60 year old film camera*.



* It is going to be a little cheating, but a [email protected] combo will stay next to the oldie in a Monochrome/Manual mode to tip exposition settings.


----------



## dilbert (Jun 9, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> My original assertion was the the M6ii was unavailable/discontinued in Australia.



Just because something is unavailable doesn't mean it is discontinued. Given all of the supply chain and transport issues, this is probably THE worst time to make such a conclusion.


----------



## bf (Jun 9, 2022)

Phenix205 said:


> Similar experience here. Among the speculation that the M system may be dead, I almost bought a Fuji X-S10 last year while seeking a light weight compact system for travel and long distance hiking. But in the end decided to go with an M6II for compatibility with my EF lenses and existing EF-M lenses.
> 
> During the spring break trip to Grand Canyon, Antelope Canyon, Bryce Canyon and Zion this April, I brought both M6II and 5DsR. During the day hikes with family, I only carried M6II plus 11-22 and 55-200. For sunset and sunrise solo photo trips, I used both but primarily the 5DsR with a couple of L lenses. The EF-M 55-200 is an OK lens but the images coming out of the 11-22 are fantastic, maybe not as crisp when compared to 5DsR side by side but more than enough for a large print on a wall of our house. For city walks, the 32 f1.4 and 22 f2 are just fabulous. With the light small system, I found I use the camera more. With the full frame beast, I often ended up using my iPhone more. The M6II is also nice for some action photos with the EF telephoto lenses except that the weight balance is not ideal.
> 
> Not interested in R7/R10 at this time with current RF-S lens options. Maybe there is a slight chance for an M7? Probably just a wishful thinking.


From R lineup: a full frame system with cost and portability in mind maybe my next purchase. Imagine R6+RF16+RF100-400. I wish R6/R5 was also available in rangefinder style for someone who doesn't wish to spend Leica money!
R7+RF100-500: not for me but almost there for my birding friends!
The rest such as RP/R10/R100: not for me! (Huh WTH?  )
M6iii with digic x: yes please!


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 9, 2022)

Bahrd said:


> That's my plan for this October. And - if weather and fuel prices are merciful - also the Yellowstone and Grand Teton parks.
> Two cameras and lenses covering the 8-600mm range are ready. I will also take a mobile stuff: a drone, a smartphone. And, for really special occasions, a 60 year old film camera*.


I didn’t think it was legal to fly drones in national parks, but I might be wrong. Best to check before you go.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 9, 2022)

Athomp2002 said:


> I wrote about the M-Lineup being done in 2020 and a lot of people with M-Cameras were mad and went off on me. I stated that it wouldn't make sense to support 3 lens lineups at the same time. They told me that the EF was going to be the one to go, and I said that is correct along with the M. you wouldn't believe how angry people were for me saying that lol. all good. They have to streamline the lineup and make sure that there is one mount moving forward. it's going to be important that all camera brands do this because of how sensitive the market can be at any given moment. I also think that the M-Series will make for a great novelty camera that people will end up paying above market value for in the future.


Yes, it's quite funny how people blame you/me about decisions Canon(!) has made. I really hope the R100 will end this madness and people will accept what Canon is offering or at least just stop complaining. The latest rumors always had started as R rumors but always ended in M speculations ... so annoying!

_But I'm only rumor after all, I'm only rumor after all, don't put your blame on me, don't put your blame on me!_


----------



## entoman (Jun 9, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> While I agree, I also think anyone participating in an Internet forum discussion should have a thick skin.
> 
> Personally, I also think it’s important to consider the source. If a young child at my kids’ school says something rude to me, I don’t get offended. I do feel sorry for the way they’ve been raised. I take the same approach with puerile adults.


Sure, we are all tempted on occasion to call out someone who is making a tit of themselves - I've been on both sides of that fence! 

But, responding to rudeness with more rudeness can lead quickly to escalation and makes for an unpleasant place to be.

The level of personal attacks on dpreview was the main reason why I quit the comments section there a couple of years ago...

I'd hate to see CR go down the same miserable path. It's a nice community, let's all try to keep it that way.


----------



## entoman (Jun 9, 2022)

Athomp2002 said:


> They have to streamline the lineup and make sure that there is one mount moving forward. it's going to be important that all camera brands do this because of how sensitive the market can be at any given moment. I also think that the M-Series will make for a great novelty camera that people will end up paying above market value for in the future.


I can see the reasoning behind your case, but there's no reason why Canon can't keep RF *and* M alive, if both are profitable, which they are. We tend to think only about our own markets (mostly North America & Europe), but the M series are huge sellers in Asia. Even EF will remain for at least another 5 years, as Rebels are still among Canon's biggest sellers.

Look at other brands - Fujifilm is doing very well with 2 mounts, Panasonic is still doing OK with 2 mounts despite having a much smaller segment of the market. I think Canon still has the largest ILC market share, they are a massive company and perfectly able to produce and sell 2 or even 3 systems concurrently. Ultimately the survival of the M series will depend on how the Asian market reacts. They tend to like small, stylish, and relatively cheap cameras there, and the M series fits that requirement far better than any other Canon product line.

BTW, I'm not a defensive M owner, just a neutral observer.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 9, 2022)

lote82 said:


> _But I'm only rumor after all..._


Yes, the R100 is just a lowly [CR1] rumor.


----------



## Bahrd (Jun 9, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> I didn’t think it was legal to fly drones in national parks, but I might be wrong. Best to check before you go.


Actually, a drone will be used during overlanding between parks, but I will double check all the legal issues there too.
Thank you!


----------



## lote82 (Jun 9, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> Yes, the R100 is just a lowly [CR1] rumor.


Yes, but a lowly rumor is still more than no rumor at all!


----------



## unfocused (Jun 9, 2022)

Bahrd said:


> That's my plan for this October. And - if weather and fuel prices are merciful - also the Yellowstone and Grand Teton parks.
> Two cameras and lenses covering the 8-600mm range are ready. I will also take a mobile stuff: a drone, a smartphone...





mdcmdcmdc said:


> I didn’t think it was legal to fly drones in national parks, but I might be wrong. Best to check before you go.


Definitely not legal. Stresses threatened wildlife and is annoying and inconsiderate of other park goers.


----------



## scyrene (Jun 9, 2022)

Athomp2002 said:


> I wrote about the M-Lineup being done in 2020 and a lot of people with M-Cameras were mad and went off on me. I stated that it wouldn't make sense to support 3 lens lineups at the same time. They told me that the EF was going to be the one to go, and I said that is correct along with the M. you wouldn't believe how angry people were for me saying that lol. all good. They have to streamline the lineup and make sure that there is one mount moving forward. it's going to be important that all camera brands do this because of how sensitive the market can be at any given moment. I also think that the M-Series will make for a great novelty camera that people will end up paying above market value for in the future.


Two years on and M cameras are still on the current roster. One day your prediction will be correct, but in the meantime I won't ask you to pick my lottery numbers.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2022)

Athomp2002 said:


> They have to streamline the lineup and make sure that there is one mount moving forward. it's going to be important that all camera brands do this because of how sensitive the market can be at any given moment.


So because the market is sensitive and unpredictable, all camera manufacturers should reduce their lineups to just a single mount. Put all their eggs in one basket, so to speak, because the market is so volatile.

I sure hope you're not responsible for determining any company's business strategy.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 9, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> So because the market is sensitive and unpredictable, all camera manufacturers should reduce their lineups to just a single mount. Put all their eggs in one basket, so to speak, because the market is so volatile.
> 
> I sure hope you're not responsible for determining any company's business strategy.


The problem is NOT having 2 or more mounts. The problem is having 2 or more mounts with similar products (APS-C cameras) selling at the same or similar price level. These offers would cannibalize each other heavily. Now that there is the R10 there is no place for M6 II anymore.

Discussion with you would be a lot easier if you would use arguments instead of personal insults!


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 9, 2022)

Athomp2002 said:


> They have to streamline the lineup and make sure that there is one mount moving forward.


Not really. The M50 and M200 target the Rebel Demographic, so they don't really need to make more EF-M lens models. Neither PowerShot buyers nor M50/200 buyers have lenses what work on R - but that's OK.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2022)

lote82 said:


> You are obviously too stupid to read properly!





lote82 said:


> Discussion with you would be a lot easier if you would use arguments instead of personal insults!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> Not really. The M50 and M200 target the Rebel Demographic, so they don't really need to make more EF-M lens models. Neither PowerShot buyers nor M50/200 buyers have lenses what work on R - but that's OK.


Correct. 

If and when R-series bodies drop down into the price range of the M50 and M200, they still may start to cannibalize M-series sales, and if R-series prices drop under $500, they may start to cannibalize entry-level DSLR sales (the T7/2000D/Kiss X90 is $480 with kit lens). 

Even at that point, as Steve Jobs said, “If you don’t cannibalize yourself, someone else will.” Canon has released lots of new camera models that cannibalized sales of previous models. They've also led the ILC market for two decades. Seems like they know what they're doing.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 9, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sadly, some people on this forum would not know a fact if it bit them on the behind. it’s hard to hear reason when your own opinion is thundering too loudly in your head.


Should I go back further down the timeline? ... 
I think this would be a good moment to start again without insults (I mean both of us) ... but maybe it's only me!


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 9, 2022)

Athomp2002 said:


> I wrote about the M-Lineup being done in 2020 and a lot of people with M-Cameras were mad and went off on me. I stated that it wouldn't make sense to support 3 lens lineups at the same time. They told me that the EF was going to be the one to go, and I said that is correct along with the M. you wouldn't believe how angry people were for me saying that lol. all good. They have to streamline the lineup and make sure that there is one mount moving forward. it's going to be important that all camera brands do this because of how sensitive the market can be at any given moment. I also think that the M-Series will make for a great novelty camera that people will end up paying above market value for in the future.


Why does everybody believe that having multiple mounts is a problem? Canon should be streamlining expensive components, like sensors and DIGIC processors, which they are doing. The mount? That’s just a piece of stamped metal. There’s very little cost efficiency to be gained from that. People who buy R bodies are generally not interested in using M lenses on them, and vice versa. These are different product lines that serve different customer segments, with different needs and different performance expectations.


----------



## entoman (Jun 9, 2022)

Some will disagree, but I think the "problem" with the M6 II is that it lacks a built-in EVF. The accessory EVF is expensive and small enough to be easily lost or forgotten. I don't know what the sales figures are, but I'd guess that it only sells in pretty low numbers and is far less profitable than e.g. the very popular M50.

Until the R7 announcement, the only alternative, for those who wanted the most up to date Canon APS and the 33MP sensor, was the rather "old fashioned" 90D. That has an integral OVF, but is far from being a compact camera. The R7 effectively, is a M6 II with an integral EVF, and I'm sure it will sell in vast quantities.

So from Canon's point of view, it may make economic sense to drop the M6 II, but to retain the cheaper and more popular M models. Whether or not they have actually made that decision remains to be seen. It's quite possible that sales in Australia were particularly poor, and that it still sells "enough" in other countries to stay in the catalogue.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> Why does everybody believe that having multiple mounts is a problem? Canon should be streamlining expensive components, like sensors and DIGIC processors, which they are doing. The mount? That’s just a piece of stamped metal. There’s very little cost efficiency to be gained from that. People who buy R bodies are generally not interested in using M lenses on them, and vice versa. These are different product lines that serve different customer segments, with different needs and different performance expectations.


The issue is not about the mount, per se, but rather lenses designed for the mount. EF lenses are different designs than RF lenses, which are different than EF-M lenses. Having said that, I agree that it's not a problem. First off, Canon is a big company. How many different styles and shapes of ink and toner cartridges do they manufacture for their printers? I don't know, but it's not a small number. They clearly have the resources to maintain multiple lines of a wide and diverse array of products.

The other factor is that Canon is not stupid. Where possible, they reuse lens designs. The RF 400/2.8 and 600/4 are EF lenses with an RF adapter fixed to the back end. The RF-S 18-45 is a new design (likely needed because 15mm doesn't need to be retrofocal with the EF-M 18mm flange distance, but would need to be with the 20mm RF flange distance), but the RF-S 18-150 is a repackaged version of the EF-M 18-150.

RF-S 18-150mm



EF-M 18-150mm



That suggests they could do the same with the EF-M primes and the M55-200. That minimizes development costs, which increases profits (and incidentally eliminates one of the biggest problems with product cannibalization).

I think this isn't a problem at all for Canon, it's only a problem in the minds of some forum participants. But then, it's clear that some forum participants have about as much business acumen as a bowling ball.


----------



## xelaq (Jun 9, 2022)

If You Don't Cannibalize Yourself, Someone Else Will - *Steve Jobs, *26 Oct 2015

I also see no issue in a huge company like Canon keeping multiple mounts.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 9, 2022)

entoman said:


> I can see the reasoning behind your case, but there's no reason why Canon can't keep RF *and* M alive, if both are profitable, which they are. We tend to think only about our own markets (mostly North America & Europe), but the M series are huge sellers in Asia. Even EF will remain for at least another 5 years, as Rebels are still among Canon's biggest sellers.
> 
> Look at other brands - Fujifilm is doing very well with 2 mounts, Panasonic is still doing OK with 2 mounts despite having a much smaller segment of the market. I think Canon still has the largest ILC market share, they are a massive company and perfectly able to produce and sell 2 or even 3 systems concurrently. Ultimately the survival of the M series will depend on how the Asian market reacts. They tend to like small, stylish, and relatively cheap cameras there, and the M series fits that requirement far better than any other Canon product line.
> 
> BTW, I'm not a defensive M owner, just a neutral observer.


As I already said, the problem is not having 2 or more mounts but the cannibalization of similar products.

Fujifilm has 2 mounts because they differ well in product specs and/or price level. One for APS-C and one for medium format with a full frame gap inbetween.
Panasonic is similar: One mount for MFT and one for full frame with even 2 formats (APS-C and full frame) inbetween.

Sony, Nikon and Canon only offer APS-C and full frame. These two formats are close together. Therefore it does make sense to give them one mount.
Exchange of format/lenses and transition of target groups is a big benefit facing an unknown future. Manufacturers can adapt faster and cheaper to new challenges and customer demands ... in a shrinking market it's wise to have less mounts with less product lines.

What about the M50 and M200? They are similar in specs and price level ...

Short answer:
They are both dying out dinosaurs!

Long answer:
Once there was a M5 and M6. Now there is only the M6 (threatened with extinction probably because of the newer R10)
Once there was a XXD and a 7D line. Now there is only the R7.
Once there was a M50 and M200. In the future there will be only the R100.

Apropos Panasonic:
They are part of the L-mount alliance and share the same mount with different(!) manufacturers.
Why are they doing this?


----------



## cayenne (Jun 9, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> I didn’t think it was legal to fly drones in national parks, but I might be wrong. Best to check before you go.


It's always legal....if they don't catch you.


----------



## entoman (Jun 9, 2022)

lote82 said:


> As I already said, the problem is not having 2 or more mounts but the cannibalization of similar products.
> 
> Fujifilm has 2 mounts because they differ well in product specs and/or price level. One for APS-C and one for medium format with a full frame gap inbetween.
> Panasonic is similar: One mount for MFT and one for full frame with even 2 formats (APS-C and full frame) inbetween.
> ...


I'm not disagreeing with your logic , just stating that Canon are a big enough and rich enough company to be able to afford to keep to both lines running if they want to do so. And for the next 3-4 years, I think that's what they'll choose to do, despite "cannibalisation", because the M50 in particular is still extremely popular in Asia, which is a major market for Canon.

As I suggested previously, the future of M doesn't depend on how you or I react, it depends on how the Asian market reacts. The M50 might well be dropped in Europe or North America if the R10 becomes more popular, despite the price difference. But, until such time as the M series get *rejected* by the Asian market, Canon will keep supplying M cameras to that market.

Canon aren't foolish enough to drop a top-selling camera. You may consider it to be a "dinosaur" but try telling that to the consumers in Japan.

For 10 years people have called DSLRs "dinosaurs", yet I think they still account for about 40% of Canon's total sales. Change is of course inevitable, but change doesn't happen rapidly, and IMO it will take at least 3 years to phase out the M series.


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 9, 2022)

entoman said:


> I can see the reasoning behind your case, but there's no reason why Canon can't keep RF *and* M alive, if both are profitable, which they are. We tend to think only about our own markets (mostly North America & Europe), but the M series are huge sellers in Asia. Even EF will remain for at least another 5 years, as Rebels are still among Canon's biggest sellers.
> 
> Look at other brands - Fujifilm is doing very well with 2 mounts, Panasonic is still doing OK with 2 mounts despite having a much smaller segment of the market. I think Canon still has the largest ILC market share, they are a massive company and perfectly able to produce and sell 2 or even 3 systems concurrently. Ultimately the survival of the M series will depend on how the Asian market reacts. They tend to like small, stylish, and relatively cheap cameras there, and the M series fits that requirement far better than any other Canon product line.
> 
> BTW, I'm not a defensive M owner, just a neutral observer.


I haven't kept any kind of official records, but lots of folks seem to think the M cameras are only best sellers in Asia, and that does not seem to be the case. Every month or so for the past year or more I check the Amazon best sellers and the M50 and/or M50 II is always near the top, usually in the top 5 although today I checked and among mirrorless the M50 II w/ kit lens and other extras is #9, M50 II content creator kit is #15 and the M200 kit is #19. 

What I think most forum member miss is that the target market for the M cameras is people buying a camera (perhaps their first) at Amazon, Best Buy, Cosco, Target, etc. Thy don't care if it is mirrorless or DSLR, they don't care if they can use RF lenses (they won't even know they exist, most likely), they are looking for inexpensive and small. It is a camera they will use for the next 5-10 years, and they won't need any more than 3 lenses at most (wide angle zoom, standard zoom, telephoto zoom) or they will choose the 18-150 as a one lens kit. They don't need eye-tracking, they don't need high fps, they don't need any R&D to be put into the system. They are just looking for something that is more versatile and an upgrade to the smartphone. Something easy to use on vacation, on family events, or for simple YouTube video creation. They are not gear-heads. At least, that is my opinion on the target market. Others, I'm sure, will disagree.

What Canon hopes ( I would think) is that at least some percentage of people who start out with an M camera, will develop a greater interest in photography and will look to get a more advanced camera, and more advanced lenses at some point. If they are happy with their M camera, Canon hopes they will check out Canon's new RF system before looking at other brands. I can't speak for others, but that was my path many years ago. Bought the original Digital Rebel and kit lens. Had no idea that it was a "crop" sensor nor did I care. (Film had many different sizes, no one in their right mind thought a smaller sized film was somehow "cropped".) Used it for 8 years until it began to have issues. Decided to "upgrade" to a 6D and bought a 24-105 L lens. Was happy with Canon, so stuck with Canon.


----------



## bf (Jun 9, 2022)

If you want to optimize a body for compactness, then, the difference between EF-m and R mount becomes important. Canon left the M line globally but later returned with M3. Even if they slow down now, they'll be back. EF-m is fighting for market share that Fuji, M4/3, and somewhat Sony, and Nikon are active in it: portable cameras that offer decent optics and much larger sensors compared to what may be placed on cellphones. They also offer a touch of nostalgia and a hint of art although Canon and Sony never showed any tastefulness in the design department.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 9, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The issue is not about the mount, per se, but rather lenses designed for the mount. EF lenses are different designs than RF lenses, which are different than EF-M lenses. Having said that, I agree that it's not a problem. First off, Canon is a big company. How many different styles and shapes of ink and toner cartridges do they manufacture for their printers? I don't know, but it's not a small number. They clearly have the resources to maintain multiple lines of a wide and diverse array of products.
> 
> The other factor is that Canon is not stupid. Where possible, they reuse lens designs. The RF 400/2.8 and 600/4 are EF lenses with an RF adapter fixed to the back end. The RF-S 18-45 is a new design (likely needed because 15mm doesn't need to be retrofocal with the EF-M 18mm flange distance, but would need to be with the 20mm RF flange distance), but the RF-S 18-150 is a repackaged version of the EF-M 18-150.
> 
> ...


On the subject of consolidation, I would speculate that the EF/EF-S and EF-M mounts already use the exact same electrical signaling and protocol. Only the form factor is different. That’s why you can buy a cheap no-name adapter on Amazon and it just works.

I would similarly speculate that the RF mount starts up in “EF mode”, with the same electrical signaling and protocol, which, again, is why the adaptors work so well. When an RF lens is attached, the mount switches to “RF mode” and enables higher data rate, more drive current, and support for the control ring and whatever else RF lenses can do that EF can’t.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2022)

entoman said:


> Canon aren't foolish enough to drop a top-selling camera. You may consider it to be a "dinosaur" but try telling that to the consumers in Japan.
> 
> For 10 years people have called DSLRs "dinosaurs", yet I think they still account for about 40% of Canon's total sales. Change is of course inevitable, but change doesn't happen rapidly, and IMO it will take at least 3 years to phase out the M series.


Indeed. Some data from 2021:

Canon sold 1.2M DSLRs. That means ~55% of all DSLRs and ~23% of all ILCs shipped in 2021 were Canon DSLRs. 

Canon sold 0.9M M-series bodies. That means ~29% of all MILCs and ~17% of all ILCs shipped in 2021 were Canon EOS Ms. 

It’s truly laughable when people suggest market segments of those sizes are ‘dead’ and that Canon is foolish enough to abandon them.


----------



## entoman (Jun 9, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> What I think most forum member miss is that the target market for the M cameras is people buying a camera (perhaps their first) at Amazon, Best Buy, Cosco, Target, etc. Thy don't care if it is mirrorless or DSLR, they don't care if they can use RF lenses (they won't even know they exist, most likely), they are looking for inexpensive and small. It is a camera they will use for the next 5-10 years, and they won't need any more than 3 lenses at most (wide angle zoom, standard zoom, telephoto zoom) or they will choose the 18-150 as a one lens kit. They don't need eye-tracking, they don't need high fps, they don't need any R&D to be put into the system. They are just looking for something that is more versatile and an upgrade to the smartphone. Something easy to use on vacation, on family events, or for simple YouTube video creation. They are not gear-heads. At least, that is my opinion on the target market. Others, I'm sure, will disagree.
> 
> What Canon hopes ( I would think) is that at least some percentage of people who start out with an M camera, will develop a greater interest in photography and will look to get a more advanced camera, and more advanced lenses at some point. If they are happy with their M camera, Canon hopes they will check out Canon's new RF system before looking at other brands.


There are also people who buy an M as a travel camera, to complement their EF or RF gear, but I think that you've described the *typical* M buyer very well.

Like every company, Canon makes the odd mistake, but they got to become the biggest brand because they know exactly how to read the market, and how to design a range of cameras that fill a whole range of niches. Sometimes people misunderstand market segmentation and perceive particular models from the same brand as being in competition with each other, when in actual fact they are filling slightly different market niches, and are complementary.

As an aside, slightly tongue-in-cheek, it probably hasn't escaped Canon's notice, that if M novices later progress to an RF model, Canon will have succeeded in selling TWO sets of lenses to them, which in terms of sales, is a very good reason for having 2 or even 3 different mounts.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 9, 2022)

dilbert said:


> Just because something is unavailable doesn't mean it is discontinued. Given all of the supply chain and transport issues, this is probably THE worst time to make such a conclusion.


Being unavailable hasn't stopped retailers advertising different Canon bodies and lenses and taking orders even if the supply chain delays have meant extensive delays in fulfillment.

The only other reason I can think of is if the Australian market variant of the M6ii has unique parts that cannot be sourced anymore. Common examples of variants include radio transmission local differences, power cords and labeling/packaging/documentation but that seems unlikely. 

It is also unlikely that a particular geographic market would discontinue a product available in other geographies unless it doesn't want to keep local stock in advance of a global discontinuation path. As I pointed out, Canon Japan also seems to have made it unavailable for purchase and you would expect Japan to be the last country to support a local product.


----------



## addola (Jun 9, 2022)

When Canon introduced the EOS M line (2012?), they did not have "future expansion into full-frame" in mind. It was around the same time the Sony E-mount came out, however, the Sony A7 was announced a year later as a FF mirrorless camera. The two mounts are similar, they have the same 18mm flange distance, and the Canon mount is slightly larger.

Canon could have just continued to use the EOS M mount for full-frame since Sony showed it can work, but Canon's decision to make a whole new mount is interesting, and is probably influenced by lens design. Things could have just introduced a larger mount in 2012 instead of the EOS M, but perhaps they were thinking about smaller form factor.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 9, 2022)

lote82 said:


> Long answer:
> Once there was a M5 and M6. Now there is only the M6 (threatened with extinction probably because of the newer R10)
> Once there was a XXD and a 7D line. Now there is only the R7.
> Once there was a M50 and M200. In the future there will be only the R100.


It is hard to follow your grammatical tenses here. "Once there was a" would indicate a fairy tale in the long distant past. Clearly this is not the case.
The xD series is still being sold (6Dii/5Div/5Ds R).
There are a number of xxD and xxxD bodies currently for sale
The M50/M200 is currently for sale

The R10 is arguably better than the 7Dii in terms of AF performance/AF points/AF aperture minimum (RF800/11 + 2xTC), mp count, fps (mech, eshutter and pre-shooting), flippy screen - and video.
If better weather sealing, IBIS, bigger battery, more mp and dual cards are important to you then the R10 is the other option

Sure, there may be a migration path but that is not clear based on the current line up.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 9, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The issue is not about the mount, per se, but rather lenses designed for the mount. EF lenses are different designs than RF lenses, which are different than EF-M lenses. Having said that, I agree that it's not a problem. First off, Canon is a big company. How many different styles and shapes of ink and toner cartridges do they manufacture for their printers? I don't know, but it's not a small number. They clearly have the resources to maintain multiple lines of a wide and diverse array of products.
> 
> The other factor is that Canon is not stupid. Where possible, they reuse lens designs. The RF 400/2.8 and 600/4 are EF lenses with an RF adapter fixed to the back end. The RF-S 18-45 is a new design (likely needed because 15mm doesn't need to be retrofocal with the EF-M 18mm flange distance, but would need to be with the 20mm RF flange distance), but the RF-S 18-150 is a repackaged version of the EF-M 18-150.
> 
> ...


So, if a bowling ball like me gets you right it is as cheap and easy to adapt same lenses on different mounts like ink cartridges on different printers, right?

You have proven the world once more that you are an incredible genius!


----------



## lote82 (Jun 9, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> It is hard to follow your grammatical tenses here. "Once there was a" would indicate both a fairy tale in the long distant past. Clearly this is not the case.
> The xD series is still being sold (6Dii/5Div/5Ds R).
> There are a number of xxD and xxxD bodies currently for sale
> The M50/M200 is currently for sale
> ...


Yes, not every camera is discontinued already. But I think it is quite obvious that not every line of camera once existed (or even still existing) will have a successor in the future. For ex. 90D and 7D was melted to R7. M5 and M6 was melted to M6 II. M50 and M200 (probably) will melt to an assuming R100. That doesn't necessarily mean all these cameras aren't produced anymore. It's just not sure if they will have an (direct) successor or not ...

What I was trying to indicate:
Time changes everything, even camera lines! In an increasingly shrinking market the camera lines will also shrink! When you have a smaller line-up of cameras (with uncertain future) it is not wise to separate them even further by supporting different mounts.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 9, 2022)

The M6 Mark II might not be officially "discontinued" by Canon Global, but production could be limited or suspended due to supply chain issues. That might explain why @David - Sydney said it was listed on the Australian website but nobody has stock, or why two national subsidiaries chose to discontinue it.

This isn't just Canon. Sony announced last November that they were halting production on a few cameras due to the global semiconductor shortage, and about a month later they did discontinue a couple of those and halted a few others. See here and here.

Under normal circumstances, Canon might sell a lot more M's than R's, but when sales of everything is limited by how many can be built, it makes sense to shift the available parts to the higher margin R's.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 9, 2022)

cayenne said:


> It's always legal....if they don't catch you.


Not funny. Just stupid.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 10, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> The M6 Mark II might not be officially "discontinued" by Canon Global, but production could be limited or suspended due to supply chain issues. That might explain why @David - Sydney said it was listed on the Australian website but nobody has stock, or why two national subsidiaries chose to discontinue it.
> 
> This isn't just Canon. Sony announced last November that they were halting production on a few cameras due to the global semiconductor shortage, and about a month later they did discontinue a couple of those and halted a few others. See here and here.
> 
> Under normal circumstances, Canon might sell a lot more M's than R's, but when sales of everything is limited by how many can be built, it makes sense to shift the available parts to the higher margin R's.


It isn't just the case that no one has stock locally. If that were the case then the retailers would show out of stock but still list the item. 
I just checked 5 larger authourised local retailers and a grey market retailer and none even have the M6ii listed at all on their websites.
Canon Australia's website normally has links to each retailer for that item when you click on "Buy" but none appears in the list indicating that they don't exist for sale anywhere
This could be an anomaly but it sure looks like discontinuation to me


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 10, 2022)

lote82 said:


> Yes, not every camera is discontinued already. But I think it is quite obvious that not every line of camera once existed (or even still existing) will have a successor in the future. For ex. 90D and 7D was melted to R7. M5 and M6 was melted to M6 II. M50 and M200 (probably) will melt to an assuming R100. That doesn't necessarily mean all these cameras aren't produced anymore. It's just not sure if they will have an (direct) successor or not ...
> 
> What I was trying to indicate:
> Time changes everything, even camera lines! In an increasingly shrinking market the camera lines will also shrink! When you have a smaller line-up of cameras (with uncertain future) it is not wise to separate them even further by supporting different mounts.


I would contend that the 7Dii melted down to 90D/M6ii given they had the obviously high pixels-on-duck reach that most 7D users wanted.

The 1D series has split and then re-united in the past. The R3 is a unique line never seen before within their digital sensor history.
Canon has just expanded their line-up of cameras and lens variants with APS-c/RF-S.
Let's now forget that besides DLSR/MILC they still sell:
- fixed lens compacts (Ixus/Powershot)
- video and cinema and adding recently the R5c as a new hybrid
- security/remote cameras
- niche products like Zoemini/Inspic and Powershot Zoom. I just read that the Zoom can take stills at 10fps!
=> Canon seem to be comfortable about having multiple product lines and varying them markedly over time

Wisdom is Canon's strategy and our knowledge of their history.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 10, 2022)

unfocused said:


> Not funny. Just stupid.


“In Jersey, anything's legal as long as you don't get caught”
Bob Dylan in Tweeter and the Monkeyman, The Traveling Wilburys


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 10, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> It isn't just the case that no one has stock locally. If that were the case then the retailers would show out of stock but still list the item.
> I just checked 5 larger authourised local retailers and a grey market retailer and none even have the M6ii listed at all on their websites.
> Canon Australia's website normally has links to each retailer for that item when you click on "Buy" but none appears in the list indicating that they don't exist for sale anywhere
> This could be an anomaly but it sure looks like discontinuation to me


I don't think it should surprise anyone if the M6 II is in fact discontinued. The supply shortages might have hastened its discontinuation, but if it is discontinued, the most likely explanation is low sales. Perhaps it sold well upon its release, but it has now been out a while and sales may have dwindled to very low numbers. I have no idea of actual numbers, so this is all pure conjecture, but I think the M6 II was always sort of an experiment. It does not fit the usual M profile of being a low priced, small size (using small lenses), easy to use, consumer level camera. Its high MP count, higher FPS, and more sophisticated AF system puts it in a bird/wildlife/action camera category. And, in my opinion, it is not a camera that is built for that market at all. Its tiny, so completely unbalanced with larger EF telephoto lenses (and there are no telephoto M lenses suitable for birds/wildlife). It has no built in EVF, a spec I think most birders, wildlife and sports shooters would prefer. And, perhaps most interestingly, it has essentially the same specs as the 90D, which I believe was released at the same time. Was Canon putting out these two cameras simultaneously to compete against each other to see which form factor users preferred? Perhaps the result was that the camera did not fit the target market at all and sales were considerably lower than anticipated. All speculation, but as a owner of a 6D II for a brief time, I found that for what it seemed best suited for (birds/wildlife/action) it was a very bad fit due to small size, no EVF and a terrible ergonomic fit with large telephoto lenses. If most consumers looking for a tiny, inexpensive ILC camera are looking at the various M offerings, why would they choose the more expensive 6D II rather then the M50 or M50 II?


----------



## GoldWing (Jun 10, 2022)

How about a sports camera that can take a splash of sea spray. These worthless toys are an insult.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 10, 2022)

GoldWing said:


> How about a sports camera that can take a splash of sea spray. These worthless toys are an insult.


That's what GoPros are for.


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 10, 2022)

GoldWing said:


> How about a sports camera that can take a splash of sea spray. These worthless toys are an insult.


Not an insult to the 98% of photographers who are smart enough to keep their cameras out of the water. You want a sports camera with pro level weather sealing, get a pro camera like the R3. Oh, I forgot, you have to have 50 MP or more despite the fact the majority of sports photographers are far happier with the 24 MPs that offer a much faster work flow.

It's only a worthless toy to an incompetent photographer.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Jun 10, 2022)

If it doesn't have a viewfinder, it's DOA.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 10, 2022)

unfocused said:


> That's what GoPros are for.


Yeah, the seal on a gopro9 was supposed to handle 10m snorkeling but it failed and corroded the battery/sd card. Thankfully they replaced it but normally water ingress is not covered. 
I will always use a housing for it now irrespective of depth.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 10, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I would contend that the 7Dii melted down to 90D/M6ii given they had the obviously high pixels-on-duck reach that most 7D users wanted.
> 
> The 1D series has split and then re-united in the past. The R3 is a unique line never seen before within their digital sensor history.
> Canon has just expanded their line-up of cameras and lens variants with APS-c/RF-S.
> ...


Yes, even revivals are possible! But even something like the R3 is rather supporting my opinion about the future of Canon mounts.

There is an R3.
There is (and will be) no M3 II.
There is (and will be) no EOS 3 II.

M is dead and EF/EF-S is dead.
When I say "dead" it doesn't mean that M and EF/EF-S products won't be produced and sold anymore. Or to say in Canon words: They will be sold "as long as there is demand".

When I say "dead" I mean there won't be any new(!) products anymore.

We can talk about if there will come something like R100 or not. Or if the assumed R100 will have an EVF or not.

Instead we could talk about M and EF/EF-S rumors. But then we would have NOTHING to talk about!


----------



## Bahrd (Jun 10, 2022)

unfocused said:


> Definitely not legal. Stresses threatened wildlife and is annoying and inconsiderate of other park goers.


♫♫
_Understandable, understandable
Yes, it's perfectly understandable
Comprehensible, comprehensible
Not a bit reprehensible, it's so defensible_!
♫♫

On a more serious note: you will probably never convince all those _catch-me-if-you-can_ guys and gals. 
(Btw, did you like that Spielberg's movie? 


mdcmdcmdc said:


> Why does everybody believe that having multiple mounts is a problem?


I believe it is not a mount itself. It is also a software behind. The M series derived its operating system from the PowerShots line. 
It means that protocols, device drivers, focusing algorithms etc. - once developed - have to be ported to two systems and maintained there.


----------



## bf (Jun 10, 2022)

Bahrd said:


> ♫♫
> _Understandable, understandable
> Yes, it's perfectly understandable
> Comprehensible, comprehensible
> ...


I believe the FW switched from eos (original M) to powershot and then returned to EOS again in later generations. They kept supporting EF lenses through the generations. The difference was mainly user interface and I think minimal effort is required there. They have already built and evolved the FW for more than a decade.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 10, 2022)

Bahrd said:


> I believe it is not a mount itself. It is also a software behind. The M series derived its operating system from the PowerShots line.
> It means that protocols, device drivers, focusing algorithms etc. - once developed - have to be ported to two systems and maintained there.


I would think it makes more sense for the M to be a fork of the EF EOS rather than PowerShot, if only to support interchangeable lenses. But I’ve never used a PowerShot so I don’t know how its menus and whatnot compare to the M and EF EOS. For all I know, they might all be branches of the same baseline. That would be the most efficient way to do it.


----------



## Phenix205 (Jun 10, 2022)

There are quite a few Canon camera “fortune tellers” on this forum and I’m very curious how many Canon cameras have they actually used. I have used, bought, and rent Canon cameras since 1980’s when I was in middle school. I still own three film cameras (including the almighty EOS 1v), six Powershots, 20D, 5DIII, 5DsR, the original M, and have rented generations of the 1D models, R5, and R6 for my kids’ sports events and trips to Alaska, Africa and Iceland. Yet I still decided to buy an M6II in late 2021 which is perfect for my needs for a light, compact, high resolution camera that has the fantastic touch and drag AF feature with 14fps mechanical shutter busting rate. 

I truly appreciate the wide product line Canon offers to meet various consumer needs. That is why they are the market leader. Instead of cursing the equipment, comparing specs on paper and watching hundreds of hours of YouTube equipment review videos, the time may be better used in studying compositions and lighting and post processing and taking photos - using whatever you have now.


----------



## koenkooi (Jun 10, 2022)

bf said:


> I believe the FW switched from eos (original M) to powershot and then returned to EOS again in later generations. They kept supporting EF lenses through the generations. The difference was mainly user interface and I think minimal effort is required there. They have already built and evolved the FW for more than a decade.


The way I understood it: The firmware for the original M was based on the EOS firmware and for subsequent models the Powershot department was put in charge of developing it further. This was done to keep the Powershot people busy after their original market was eaten by smartphones.

If you look at the M50 firmware, that was, in hindsight, very clearly a trial run for the EOS R firmware. I don't think there is any difference between firmware for the rumoured R100 and a new M model, they will both lean heavily towards Scenes.


----------



## Bahrd (Jun 10, 2022)

@bf, @koenkooi & @mdcmdcmdc - it could indeed be the case (in all versions of the EOS SDK I have been using, the EOS M models used to lack a remote control feature and only recently the newest models M200/M50II/M6II have become fully supported).

PS
Does this unification effort mean that EOS M can have a brighter and future future?


----------



## SnowMiku (Jun 10, 2022)

Phenix205 said:


> There are quite a few Canon camera “fortune tellers” on this forum and I’m very curious how many Canon cameras have they actually used. I have used, bought, and rent Canon cameras since 1980’s when I was in middle school. I still own three film cameras (including the almighty EOS 1v), six Powershots, 20D, 5DIII, 5DsR, the original M, and have rented generations of the 1D models, R5, and R6 for my kids’ sports events and trips to Alaska, Africa and Iceland. Yet I still decided to buy an M6II in late 2021 which is perfect for my needs for a light, compact, high resolution camera that has the fantastic touch and drag AF feature with 14fps mechanical shutter busting rate.
> 
> I truly appreciate the wide product line Canon offers to meet various consumer needs. That is why they are the market leader. Instead of cursing the equipment, comparing specs on paper and watching hundreds of hours of YouTube equipment review videos, the time may be better used in studying compositions and lighting and post processing and taking photos - using whatever you have now.



My Canon cameras from oldest to newest is the SX100IS, SX40, SX710, 700D, M5, 90D. These days I mainly use the 90D and M5 but all the others still work.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 10, 2022)

SnowMiku said:


> My Canon cameras from oldest to newest is the SX100IS, SX40, SX710, 700D, M5, 90D. These days I mainly use the 90D and M5 but all the others still work.


My first SLR of any kind was a Canon AV-1 I bought (used) in 1982 when I was in high school. My first EOS was a 100 (international version of the Elan - I was living in Scotland at the time) I bought in 1992. Had a lot of fun and learned a lot traveling with the 100! 

After that came 20D, Rebel T2i, 70D, 7D, 7D Mark II, and M5.

No PowerShots, but I’m hoping to add an R7 to the list before the end of the month!


----------



## koenkooi (Jun 10, 2022)

Bahrd said:


> @bf, @koenkooi & @mdcmdcmdc - it could indeed be the case (in all versions of the EOS SDK I have been using, the EOS M models used to lack a remote control feature and only recently the newest models M200/M50II/M6II have become fully supported).
> 
> PS
> Does this unification effort mean that EOS M can have a brighter and future future?


It means that a lot of existing software pieces can get reused, which means less engineering time would be needed. Only Canon knows if they want to spend time and money on developing M further.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 10, 2022)

Phenix205 said:


> There are quite a few Canon camera “fortune tellers” on this forum and I’m very curious how many Canon cameras have they actually used. I have used, bought, and rent Canon cameras since 1980’s when I was in middle school. I still own three film cameras (including the almighty EOS 1v), six Powershots, 20D, 5DIII, 5DsR, the original M, and have rented generations of the 1D models, R5, and R6 for my kids’ sports events and trips to Alaska, Africa and Iceland.


My first Canon camera was a Rebel T1i/500D, bought in 2009 (I shot film on Minolta then Pentax SLRs, then returned from a photography hiatus with Olympus 35mm P&S cameras followed by Olympus digital P&S cameras ending with a 4 MP superzoom). 

From Canon, I've owned the T1i/500D, two PowerShots (S95 and S100, I wanted something small that shot RAW), the 7D, 5DII, 1D X, original M, M2, M6, EOS R and EOS R3.


----------



## entoman (Jun 10, 2022)

Phenix205 said:


> There are quite a few Canon camera “fortune tellers” on this forum and I’m very curious how many Canon cameras have they actually used.


In my case I've owned 40D, 50D, 7D, 7DMkii, 6D, 5DMkiii, and 5DS. Currently I own 5DMkiv and R5, both of which I use regularly, shooting at least couple of thousand images every month. I've also owned many Canon lenses, which currently include 24mm T/S-E, RF 24-105mm, RF 100-500mm, EF 100-400mm, RF 800mm F11, EF 100mm macro and EF 180mm macro. In addition to these I've owned Sony a100, a700; Nikon D610, D810; and film SLRs from Canon, Chinon, Contax, Exakta, Fujica, Konica, Minolta, Miranda, Nikon, Pentax, Praktica and Yashica. I also have several Canon-owning friends and colleagues, so I get to hear a lot of comments from them too, so I think I'm probably fairly well placed to make a few guesses about Canon's future activities.

Curiosity satisfied?


----------



## AlanF (Jun 10, 2022)

entoman said:


> In my case I've owned 40D, 50D, 7D, 7DMkii, 6D, 5DMkiii, and 5DS. Currently I own 5DMkiv and R5, both of which I use regularly, shooting at least couple of thousand images every month. I've also owned many Canon lenses, which currently include 24mm T/S-E, RF 24-105mm, RF 100-500mm, EF 100-400mm, RF 800mm F11, EF 100mm macro and EF 180mm macro. In addition to these I've owned Sony a100, a700; Nikon D610, D810; and film SLRs from Canon, Chinon, Contax, Exakta, Fujica, Konica, Minolta, Miranda, Nikon, Pentax, Praktica and Yashica. I also have several Canon-owning friends and colleagues, so I get to hear a lot of comments from them too, so I think I'm probably fairly well placed to make a few guesses about Canon's future activities.
> 
> Curiosity satisfied?


“I never think of the future, it comes soon enough.” Albert Einstein


----------



## entoman (Jun 10, 2022)

AlanF said:


> “I never think of the future, it comes soon enough.” Albert Einstein


At my age, I know exactly what he meant!

Five years into the future is about as far ahead as I intend thinking!


----------



## GoldWing (Jun 11, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> Not an insult to the 98% of photographers who are smart enough to keep their cameras out of the water. You want a sports camera with pro level weather sealing, get a pro camera like the R3. Oh, I forgot, you have to have 50 MP or more despite the fact the majority of sports photographers are far happier with the 24 MPs that offer a much faster work flow.
> 
> It's only a worthless toy to an incompetent photographer.


The R3 is a toy.


----------



## dilbert (Jun 11, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> The only other reason I can think of is if the Australian market variant of the M6ii has unique parts that cannot be sourced anymore. Common examples of variants include radio transmission local differences, power cords and labeling/packaging/documentation but that seems unlikely.
> 
> It is also unlikely that a particular geographic market would discontinue a product available in other geographies unless it doesn't want to keep local stock in advance of a global discontinuation path. As I pointed out, Canon Japan also seems to have made it unavailable for purchase and you would expect Japan to be the last country to support a local product.



Maybe customer demand for the M6II is light due to the relative expense.

As I said, the M6II is a significant price hike over the M6. It feels like Canon are experimenting with what the market for that form factor camera will tolerate in terms of price.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 11, 2022)

GoldWing said:


> The R3 is a toy.


If the R3 in your hands is equivalent to a Hello Kitty digicam, that’s not the R3’s fault.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 11, 2022)

dilbert said:


> Maybe customer demand for the M6II is light due to the relative expense.
> 
> As I said, the M6II is a significant price hike over the M6. It feels like Canon are experimenting with what the market for that form factor camera will tolerate in terms of price.


Maybe demand is light because all of the Australian consumers have been reading the rumor sites and they know the M series is about to be discontinued.


----------



## entoman (Jun 11, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> I don't think it should surprise anyone if the M6 II is in fact discontinued. The supply shortages might have hastened its discontinuation, but if it is discontinued, the most likely explanation is low sales. Perhaps it sold well upon its release, but it has now been out a while and sales may have dwindled to very low numbers. I have no idea of actual numbers, so this is all pure conjecture, but I think the M6 II was always sort of an experiment. It does not fit the usual M profile of being a low priced, small size (using small lenses), easy to use, consumer level camera. Its high MP count, higher FPS, and more sophisticated AF system puts it in a bird/wildlife/action camera category. And, in my opinion, it is not a camera that is built for that market at all. Its tiny, so completely unbalanced with larger EF telephoto lenses (and there are no telephoto M lenses suitable for birds/wildlife). It has no built in EVF, a spec I think most birders, wildlife and sports shooters would prefer. And, perhaps most interestingly, it has essentially the same specs as the 90D, which I believe was released at the same time. Was Canon putting out these two cameras simultaneously to compete against each other to see which form factor users preferred? Perhaps the result was that the camera did not fit the target market at all and sales were considerably lower than anticipated. All speculation, but as a owner of a 6D II for a brief time, I found that for what it seemed best suited for (birds/wildlife/action) it was a very bad fit due to small size, no EVF and a terrible ergonomic fit with large telephoto lenses. If most consumers looking for a tiny, inexpensive ILC camera are looking at the various M offerings, why would they choose the more expensive 6D II ( I assume you mean M6 II ) rather then the M50 or M50 II?


The simultaneous release of M6 II and 90D with near-identical specifications but different form factors, was obviously designed to cater for the wants of 2 different types of user. I got the feeling at the time that Canon saw the possible impending death of the DSLR looming on the horizon, and were experimenting to see how best to present a mirrorless alternative. I think Canon misinterpreted the market in this instance. The M6 II was a bad choice IMO for precisely the reasons you have suggested, and the R7 is a much better solution, albeit still not the pro APS-C sports/wildlife camera that many of us hoped for.


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 12, 2022)

entoman said:


> The simultaneous release of M6 II and 90D with near-identical specifications but different form factors, was obviously designed to cater for the wants of 2 different types of user. I got the feeling at the time that Canon saw the possible impending death of the DSLR looming on the horizon, and were experimenting to see how best to present a mirrorless alternative. I think Canon misinterpreted the market in this instance. The M6 II was a bad choice IMO for precisely the reasons you have suggested, and the R7 is a much better solution, albeit still not the pro APS-C sports/wildlife camera that many of us hoped for.


I think Canon hopes the rumored high MP FF camera is the "pro APS-C sports/wildlife camera" that you mention many are hoping for.


----------



## dilbert (Jun 12, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> Maybe demand is light because all of the Australian consumers have been reading the rumor sites and they know the M series is about to be discontinued.



Times I have made Camera-related purchasing decisions based on rumors: 0
Times I have made Camera-related purchasing decisions based on price: every time


----------



## AlanF (Jun 12, 2022)

dilbert said:


> Times I have made Camera-related purchasing decisions based on rumors: 0
> Times I have made Camera-related purchasing decisions based on price: every time


Have you bought any Canon camera in recent years?


----------



## SnowMiku (Jun 12, 2022)

entoman said:


> The simultaneous release of M6 II and 90D with near-identical specifications but different form factors, was obviously designed to cater for the wants of 2 different types of user. I got the feeling at the time that Canon saw the possible impending death of the DSLR looming on the horizon, and were experimenting to see how best to present a mirrorless alternative. I think Canon misinterpreted the market in this instance. The M6 II was a bad choice IMO for precisely the reasons you have suggested, and the R7 is a much better solution, albeit still not the pro APS-C sports/wildlife camera that many of us hoped for.



When I upgraded last year I was thinking of the 90D or M6 II, the reason why I choose the 90D was because of the viewfinder, battery life, ergonomics and weather sealing. If the M6 II had a proper viewfinder, weather sealing (I'm aware that EF-M lenses don't have weather sealing), more ergonomic and the LP-E6 battery I would have chosen that. The R7 is all of those things but more expensive. It would have been nice if the R10 had weather sealing, bigger ergonomics and the LP-E6 battery since it's around the same price as the 90D.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jun 12, 2022)

SnowMiku said:


> When I upgraded last year I was thinking of the 90D or M6 II, the reason why I choose the 90D was because of the viewfinder, battery life, ergonomics and weather sealing. If the M6 II had a proper viewfinder, weather sealing (I'm aware that EF-M lenses don't have weather sealing), more ergonomic and the LP-E6 battery I would have chosen that. The R7 is all of those things but more expensive. It would have been nice if the R10 had weather sealing, bigger ergonomics and the LP-E6 battery since it's around the same price as the 90D.



I believe the 90D and M6 are for different markets. I would choose the 90D for wildlife photography, sports and photography trips. The M6 is great for city breaks, family events, traveling and where small size is a priority. The M6 with LP-E6 battery, viewfinder and better ergonomic would be much bigger.


----------



## entoman (Jun 12, 2022)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I believe the 90D and M6 are for different markets. I would choose the 90D for wildlife photography, sports and photography trips. The M6 is great for city breaks, family events, traveling and where small size is a priority. The M6 with LP-E6 battery, viewfinder and better ergonomic would be much bigger.


Yes. I'd make the same decision. The 90D is definitely better for wildlife and sports. Poking a long lens on a M6 II for wildlife etc makes for a very unbalanced and fiddly experience IMO. The M bodies are best used with small compact lightweight lenses, which limits their versatility, although they are excellent as travel cameras.

Fitting a bigger battery, EVF and improved ergonomics would dictate a larger body, and that is basically what Canon have done in giving us the R7. The new ergos of the R7 look pretty good (apart from the lack of a third dial and a couple of other niggles, that users can adjust to), but I would have preferred if they'd stuck with the R6 body for the R7. That however would have presumably pushed the R7 very close to the price of the R6, so I can't really fault Canon's marketing logic.


----------



## dilbert (Jun 12, 2022)

AlanF said:


> Have you bought any Canon camera in recent years?



None of your business.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 13, 2022)

Like others here have already said, merely an attempt for CR to make up for its whiff again and erroneous speculation of the R10 being the M series replacement and Canon Rumor's decade long campaign against it. Being thoroughly squashed by Canon themselves. Move on to something else. Its obvious that CR does not understand the small compact camera market. CR believes that everyone needs, desires, or requires a naitive Canon lens. They simply have it all wrong. For a decade now.


----------



## jam05 (Jun 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> Yes. I'd make the same decision. The 90D is definitely better for wildlife and sports. Poking a long lens on a M6 II for wildlife etc makes for a very unbalanced and fiddly experience IMO. The M bodies are best used with small compact lightweight lenses, which limits their versatility, although they are excellent as travel cameras.
> 
> Fitting a bigger battery, EVF and improved ergonomics would dictate a larger body, and that is basically what Canon have done in giving us the R7. The new ergos of the R7 look pretty good (apart from the lack of a third dial and a couple of other niggles, that users can adjust to), but I would have preferred if they'd stuck with the R6 body for the R7. That however would have presumably pushed the R7 very close to the price of the R6, so I can't really fault Canon's marketing logic.


Yes, and CR has completely left out entire genres and markets. UAS/drones, real estate, travel, vlogging, etc. For some of these genres an EVF is not only not required it isnt wanted at all. In some instances CR needs to crawl from under the rock and discover what's going on. The Zhiyun Crane compact gimbal camera compatibility list may be a perfect starting point. Note: The M series cameras do not require a tiny sub compact lens for every application, simply small enough, for example to clear gimbal vertical pitch angles. Sigma and other manufacturers have filled the void. On a tripod streaming video content, balance is no problem.


----------



## John Wilde (Jun 13, 2022)

AlanF said:


> “I never think of the future, it comes soon enough.” Albert Einstein


"Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." - Niels Bohr


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 14, 2022)

lote82 said:


> M is dead and EF/EF-S is dead.
> When I say "dead" it doesn't mean that M and EF/EF-S products won't be produced and sold anymore. Or to say in Canon words: They will be sold "as long as there is demand".
> 
> When I say "dead" I mean there won't be any new(!) products anymore.


Having a personal definition of "death" doesn't help general communication. 
By multiple sources, *Death* is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism. Death is final and absolute.

"End of sale" and "end of support" are good definitions of the final life stage of a product's life. Although some product item pruning has occurred, it is clear that no announcement about even end-of-sale has been made. Clearly a long way from being "dead" and I would contend that M / EF/EF-S are in the maturity/cashcow life stage (and have been for some time).

I suggest that we move to using more definitions used by industry wrt product lifecycle stages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_life-cycle_management_(marketing)
Is a good primer but there is a lot of other good and free educational material out there.


----------



## Botts (Jun 14, 2022)

Here I am still waiting for an EOS R Mk II, but I might just have to suck it up and buy an EOS R6.


----------



## lote82 (Jun 14, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Having a personal definition of "death" doesn't help general communication.
> By multiple sources, *Death* is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism. Death is final and absolute.
> 
> "End of sale" and "end of support" are good definitions of the final life stage of a product's life. Although some product item pruning has occurred, it is clear that no announcement about even end-of-sale has been made. Clearly a long way from being "dead" and I would contend that M / EF/EF-S are in the maturity/cashcow life stage (and have been for some time).
> ...


Thank you for correcting my bad English!

Of course things can't be dead. But if things can't be dead, they can't be "alive" neither! Regarding to "end of support" the term dead is at least closer to correct than alive!


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 14, 2022)

lote82 said:


> Thank you for correcting my bad English!
> 
> Of course things can't be dead. But if things can't be dead, they can't be "alive" neither! Regarding to "end of support" the term dead is at least closer to correct than alive!


There’s nothing wrong with your English. “Dead” is a perfectly acceptable description of inanimate objects. Both Merriam-Webster (American English) and Cambridge (British English) dictionaries give the example of “a dead battery” as an acceptable use.

@David - Sydney is just being pedantic because he didn’t like you using the word in reference to EF-M and EF/EF-S.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 14, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> There’s nothing wrong with your English. “Dead” is a perfectly acceptable description of inanimate objects. Both Merriam-Webster (American English) and Cambridge (British English) dictionaries give the example of “a dead battery” as an acceptable use.
> 
> @David - Sydney is just being pedantic because he didn’t like you using the word in reference to EF-M and EF/EF-S.


That's the thing, though. Using the word 'dead' to describe something, whether animate or inanimate, when that being or thing is 'alive' is not an appropriate use of the word. 

@David - Sydney's suggested use of 'end of sale' and 'end of support' are good definitions of the final life stage of a product's life is reasonable and logical. M-series cameras are clearly still being sold (and sold well, the M50 II was the best-selling ILC in Japan last week, as it has been almost every week for the past couple of years). I do think 'end of sale' is probably the most reasonable definition for a 'dead' camera line. 'End of support' is somewhat later, because Canon like most manufacturers will continue to support products for several years after they are sold.


----------



## Czardoom (Jun 14, 2022)

Botts said:


> Here I am still waiting for an EOS R Mk II, but I might just have to suck it up and buy an EOS R6.


Any particular reason that you are in a hurry? Based on the rumors, anyway, some sort of announcement or newer information should be coming this year regarding newer models/replacements for the R and RP.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 14, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> There’s nothing wrong with your English. “Dead” is a perfectly acceptable description of inanimate objects. Both Merriam-Webster (American English) and Cambridge (British English) dictionaries give the example of “a dead battery” as an acceptable use.
> 
> @David - Sydney is just being pedantic because he didn’t like you using the word in reference to EF-M and EF/EF-S.


Being pedantic and having definitions for terms is reasonable so that we have common understanding when it comes to debates.
Misunderstandings have lead to wars (flame or physical) in the past.
Frankly, I have no incentive for arguing that we need to sustain the M or EF-S lines (see my gear list). Direct replacement of my EF lenses if needed would be preferred but could be an existing RF equivalent (at a higher cost) except that there is no equivalent for the EF8-15mm/4


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 14, 2022)

lote82 said:


> Thank you for correcting my bad English!
> 
> Of course things can't be dead. But if things can't be dead, they can't be "alive" neither! Regarding to "end of support" the term dead is at least closer to correct than alive!


"End of support" is the final death for a product. Just look at Microsoft's efforts to have end-of-support dates for Windows XP for instance which was released in 2001 but...

"Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009, and extended support ended on April 8, 2014. After that, the operating system ceased receiving further support. Windows Embedded POSReady 2009, based on Windows XP Professional, received security updates until April 2019. After that, unofficial methods were made available to apply the updates to other editions of Windows XP. Still, Microsoft discouraged this practice, citing incompatibility issues.[10] As of May 2022, 0.44% of Windows PCs[9] run Windows XP (on all continents, the share is below 1%), and 0.1% of all devices across all platforms run Windows XP. Windows XP is still in widespread use in certain countries, such as Armenia, where over 50–60% of computers use it. "


----------



## lote82 (Jun 14, 2022)

You contradict yourself! First you claim "*Death* is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism".


David - Sydney said:


> By multiple sources, *Death* is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism. Death is final and absolute.


Now you are talking about "the final death for a product". Is "product" an "organism" with "biological functions"?


David - Sydney said:


> "End of support" is the final death for a product. Just look at Microsoft's efforts to have end-of-support dates for Windows XP for instance which was released in 2001 but...
> 
> "Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009, and extended support ended on April 8, 2014. After that, the operating system ceased receiving further support. Windows Embedded POSReady 2009, based on Windows XP Professional, received security updates until April 2019. After that, unofficial methods were made available to apply the updates to other editions of Windows XP. Still, Microsoft discouraged this practice, citing incompatibility issues.[10] As of May 2022, 0.44% of Windows PCs[9] run Windows XP (on all continents, the share is below 1%), and 0.1% of all devices across all platforms run Windows XP. Windows XP is still in widespread use in certain countries, such as Armenia, where over 50–60% of computers use it. "


You also stated "Death is final and absolute". When "Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009" why it "received security updates until April 2019"? So "End of support" doesn't sound "final and absolute" to me!


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 14, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> That's the thing, though. Using the word 'dead' to describe something, whether animate or inanimate, when that being or thing is 'alive' is not an appropriate use of the word.
> 
> @David - Sydney's suggested use of 'end of sale' and 'end of support' are good definitions of the final life stage of a product's life is reasonable and logical. M-series cameras are clearly still being sold (and sold well, the M50 II was the best-selling ILC in Japan last week, as it has been almost every week for the past couple of years). I do think 'end of sale' is probably the most reasonable definition for a 'dead' camera line. 'End of support' is somewhat later, because Canon like most manufacturers will continue to support products for several years after they are sold.


Language is inherently imprecise. This isn't a specialized scientific field where we can expect everybody who contributes to use an agreed upon vernacular. Even if you don't agree with what @lote82 was saying (and I'm pretty sure you and I have similar views on that), his choice of words was more than adequate to make his opinion clear.

It was only a week ago that I read post #2 in this very thread:


neuroanatomist said:


> EOS M is dead. Long live EOS M.


I assumed you were being sarcastic, which is why I gave the post a "like". But you didn't seem to mind applying the words "dead" and "live" to an inanimate object then.

That's it for me. I'm not going to be drawn into a throw-down over semantics. I generally respect your opinions and what you post here, but this discussion is pointless IMO.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 14, 2022)

lote82 said:


> You contradict yourself! First you claim "*Death* is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism".
> 
> Now you are talking about "the final death for a product". Is "product" an "organism" with "biological functions"?
> 
> You also stated "Death is final and absolute". When "Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009" why it "received security updates until April 2019"? So "End of support" doesn't sound "final and absolute" to me!


The definition of "Death" assumes life for an organism which clearly a product doesn't have. Death is meaningless for a product in that context but in practical terms, death would be the end-of-support date for a product from a manufacturer's perspective.

Perhaps I shouldn't have muddied the water with XP which was a dog's breakfast for MS to discontinue support. A perpetual SW license never "dies" and continues to work indefinitely as it is just lines of code.

Windows XP is a classic example of the problems that a manufacturer (of SW in this case) to try to "kill" off a product. MS tried multiple times to have a end-of-support date for XP as it costs MS money to support for security etc patches but they had no revenue to offset it.
XP was embedded in many, many ways with applications on top where not updated to support newer operating systems. These ancient SW applications were discovered to be essential for medical and manufacturing critical equipment made at the time. The end user's desperate calls to MS were sufficient to keep it going for 17 years and outlived its successor. 
It would be reasonably safe to continue to use it in an "air-gapped" application ie no connection to the internet. It would be relatively simple to crack it if you had direct access though.

The opposite issue is when a customer mandates that a supplier support a product for 20 years. This happened when telecommunications switching equipment was being selected in the '90s. Given the pace of change of telco/internet equipment space, it should have been an unreasonable request as even getting semiconductors orderable over that time is unreasonable. The R&D work to keep circuit boards current when processor and memory chips are updated multiple times a year is crazy. The only option is to make a big manufacturing run and keep the boards on the shelf to support future failures and hope that all the equipment is deinstalled/replaced quickly before they run out.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 14, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> Language is inherently imprecise. This isn't a specialized scientific field where we can expect everybody who contributes to use an agreed upon vernacular. Even if you don't agree with what @lote82 was saying (and I'm pretty sure you and I have similar views on that), his choice of words was more than adequate to make his opinion clear.
> 
> It was only a week ago that I read post #2 in this very thread:
> 
> ...


My quibble is not about the use of 'dead' to refer to an inanimate object. That's why I stated, "...whether animate or inanimate..." If someone says that Cleopatra is dead or the 5.25" floppy disk is dead, both are fine. But if someone says the Taylor Swift or the iPhone is dead, that's not correct. 

Yes, his opinion was clear. An analogy would be that whether someone states that the Earth is flat or that the earth is a disc, both are clear expressions of an opinion that is contradicted by the facts.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Jun 15, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> My quibble is not about the use of 'dead' to refer to an inanimate object. That's why I stated, "...whether animate or inanimate..." If someone says that Cleopatra is dead or the 5.25" floppy disk is dead, both are fine. But if someone says the Taylor Swift or the iPhone is dead, that's not correct.
> 
> Yes, his opinion was clear. An analogy would be that whether someone states that the Earth is flat or that the earth is a disc, both are clear expressions of an opinion that is contradicted by the facts.


I feel like we're in violent agreement. I don't agree with his statement about EF-M and EF/EF-S, but I do believe the way he expressed it was entirely appropriate. Those are two different things in my view.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 15, 2022)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> I feel like we're in violent agreement. I don't agree with his statement about EF-M and EF/EF-S, but I do believe the way he expressed it was entirely appropriate. Those are two different things in my view.


Lol. I violently agree. In current US politics, there are lots of people expressing things in entirely appropriate ways, while being completely wrong at the same time. Appropriate expression of a concept and being correct about that concept are independent of one another.


----------



## SaP34US (Jun 17, 2022)

My hopes the R100 or whatever it’s called are as follows: 1. 20mp to 24mp; 2. A lower class ibis 3 axis to test the new system or none; 3. Both the black & white video/ photo and grainy black & white for both video & photo; 4. 480i, 720p, 1080p & 4k oversampled form 5k; 5. Filmic filters; and 6. jpeg & heif as well as RAW.


----------



## Rocky (Jun 18, 2022)

The discussion of "DEAD" is boarder line hair splitting. English is already more precise than some other languages. Try the Cantonese from Hong Kong in recent years. People can get totally lost (do not understand or misunderstand) if you have not lived there for a while, even you can speak fluent old Cantonese.


----------



## cayenne (Jun 21, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> "End of support" is the final death for a product. Just look at Microsoft's efforts to have end-of-support dates for Windows XP for instance which was released in 2001 but...
> 
> "Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009, and extended support ended on April 8, 2014. After that, the operating system ceased receiving further support. Windows Embedded POSReady 2009, based on Windows XP Professional, received security updates until April 2019. After that, unofficial methods were made available to apply the updates to other editions of Windows XP. Still, Microsoft discouraged this practice, citing incompatibility issues.[10] As of May 2022, 0.44% of Windows PCs[9] run Windows XP (on all continents, the share is below 1%), and 0.1% of all devices across all platforms run Windows XP. Windows XP is still in widespread use in certain countries, such as Armenia, where over 50–60% of computers use it. "


Hmm...how about "no longer in production"...?

That's kinda dead too.


----------



## Memirsbrunnr (Jun 26, 2022)

Lets hope they finally retire the silly Rebel and Kiss names for the budget line of cameras-- They are just too cringe.. Just use them standardised under a R100 series name.


----------



## DogpackChris (Jun 30, 2022)

Then there is this: https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...ine-does-have-a-place-in-our-range-says-canon


----------



## SnowMiku (Jun 30, 2022)

DogpackChris said:


> Then there is this: https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...ine-does-have-a-place-in-our-range-says-canon


It's interesting that the article was saying that they didn't really design them for video or content creators, but that's how people are using them. Maybe an M50 mk III will get 4k video with no crop and with DPAF?


----------



## SaP34US (Jun 30, 2022)

When will the R 100 or whatever it will called be released? I hope that it has an EVF, 4k, and is 20-24mp. It would be even more interesting if it was Rangefinder style camera.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 10, 2022)

cayenne said:


> Hmm...how about "no longer in production"...?
> 
> That's kinda dead too.


I haven't seen a end-of-production date before. Manufacturers will make batches of each product as needed unless the volume is large enough to have a continuous manufacturing process. That date normally isn't available outside of the company though as it isn't customer facing. You never know how much product is in finished good inventory or on distributor/retailer shelves.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 11, 2022)

Different geographies have some autonomy on products they carry, e.g., the M2 wasn’t released in North America. Perhaps Japan and Australia felt the M6II wouldn’t sell well alongside the R10, so they stopped selling the M6II in advance of the R10’s launch. Canon management in other countries felt differently, so the M6II remains ‘current’ in most of the world.


----------



## Inspired (Sep 2, 2022)

I need to see something that can compete with Sony's ZV1 and the RX100


----------

