# Canon has discontinued the Canon EOS M6 Mark II



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 4, 2022)

> 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 around the globe.
> With no rumoured successor, we think that this may be the biggest sign yet that the EOS M system is going to be phased out in favour of an RF mount APS-C camera line.
> The Canon EOS R7 will be a more “professional” design, but we fully expect Canon to announce an RF mount APS-C camera or two in the future with similar ergonomics as the EOS M series.
> More to come…



Continue reading...


----------



## Maximilian (May 4, 2022)

I don't like this news.
Because I cannot imagine if and what consequences this means to the EOS M system.
I am no M owner. But if I was to get one body It would have been the M6 II. Because I like the idea of the optional EVF.

Edit: In Germany almost every shop has it on stock.


----------



## unfocused (May 4, 2022)

This should be good for another dozen pages of forum battles.


----------



## mustafa (May 4, 2022)

I’m still waiting for the M5 Mk II.


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 4, 2022)

mustafa said:


> I’m still waiting for the M5 Mk II.


The body which would have made a lot more sense to me than having a flagship have no VF. I enjoyed using our M5, the updated sensor of the M6 ll might have made it a travel champ. Shame.


----------



## lote82 (May 4, 2022)

mustafa said:


> I’m still waiting for the M5 Mk II.


I'm still waiting for the M7


----------



## john1970 (May 4, 2022)

Suggests that Canon is adopting the APSC format into the EOS R system and discontinuing the EF-M system. Frankly makes sense from a business perspective.


----------



## lote82 (May 4, 2022)

john1970 said:


> Suggests that Canon is adopting the APSC format into the EOS R system and discontinuing the EF-M system. Frankly makes sense from a business perspective.


As I already stated I only see two APS-C options for Canon:
1. APS-C in R-system.
2. No APS-C anymore.
Hope for 1.


----------



## lote82 (May 4, 2022)

unfocused said:


> This should be good for another dozen pages of forum battles.


I swear this will end in comment-bloodbath!


----------



## Chaitanya (May 4, 2022)

Once again we can blame pandemic led shortages for this mess we're in, also its surprising M6 II has been dropped so early.


----------



## pzyber (May 4, 2022)

It's not listed as discontinued by Canon Japan yet.
Maybe only in certain markets?


----------



## John Wilde (May 4, 2022)

The M50 line may live on, because I doubt that Canon will ever make an R at that price point. The M200 could be a replacement for the PowerShot G7, because both have the same no-viewfinder, no-hot-shoe form factor.


----------



## lote82 (May 4, 2022)

pzyber said:


> It's not listed as discontinued by Canon Japan yet.
> Maybe only in certain markets?


"We have received reports from *two different countries ...*"


----------



## bbasiaga (May 4, 2022)

Many have been afraid the M series would die soon. Maybe this is the sign. I really like the form factor of my M50. Will be sad to see the system go, if that is what happens. 

Brian


----------



## Kit Chan (May 4, 2022)

If they don't follow up with an M7 announcement that'll solidify my decision to change to Fuji. I don't want a bulky FF mount on an APS-C camera.


----------



## Del Paso (May 4, 2022)

I believe it's about time Canon inform us about the M's future.
Presently, I wouldn't dare to invest in this system, there are just too many contradictory news about it. On the one hand, sales are high, on the other hand no novelties and even the news of the discontinued M6 II. I too was waiting for an M 5II...
Sorry Canon, but customers like to know what's going on. Nobody asks Canon to divulge some classified info.
But we'd like to know whether it makes sense to spend our hard-earned money on a system that could be obsolete soon.


----------



## lote82 (May 4, 2022)

Kit Chan said:


> If they don't follow up with an M7 announcement that'll solidify my decision to change to Fuji. I don't want a bulky FF mount on an APS-C camera.


Just wait for the R7 to come!


----------



## Ravren (May 4, 2022)

As a former owner of the M50. I loved the size of the system, especially with the compact lenses. So this is sad but also good news in a way and I hope it means Canon is working on something similar for the R mount because I miss having a compact camera for travel. Lunging around my R6 w/ the RF 24-105L at Disney was not fun and it really made me wish I still had the compact M series camera.


----------



## lote82 (May 4, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> I believe it's about time Canon inform us about the M's future.
> Presently, I wouldn't dare to invest in this system, there are just too many contradictory news about it. On the one hand, sales are high, on the other hand no novelties and even the news of the discontinued M6 II. I too was waiting for an M 5II...
> Sorry Canon, but customers like to know what's going on. Nobody asks Canon to divulge some classified info.
> But we'd like to know whether it makes sense to spend our hard-earned money on a system that could be obsolete soon.


Canon knows you wouldn't invest in a dead (or dying) system. Therefore they will never tell you!


----------



## John Wilde (May 4, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> I believe it's about time Canon inform us about the M's future.
> Presently, I wouldn't dare to invest in this system, there are just too many contradictory news about it. On the one hand, sales are high, on the other hand no novelties and even the news of the discontinued M6 II. I too was waiting for an M 5II...
> Sorry Canon, but customers like to know what's going on. Nobody asks Canon to divulge some classified info.
> But we'd like to know whether it makes sense to spend our hard-earned money on a system that could be obsolete soon.



I can't remember the last time that Canon acknowledged the existence of M. It's never mentioned in their financial documents. It wasn't even mentioned in their "Canon EOS System celebrates 35th anniversary" press release. I want M to continue, but it looks pretty bleak.
​


----------



## speg (May 4, 2022)

I would have loved for the M series to have lived a long and prosperous life. Alas, the writing was on the wall long ago. I am sad, but do not regret making the jump to the R series.

Hopefully in the future we get some neat APS-C bodies that are super small and slim, maybe even with some retro styling like the Z fc? Pop some smaller RF lenses on there for your vacation and I’ll be a happy camper.


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 4, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> The M50 line may live on, because I doubt that Canon will ever make an R at that price point. The M200 could be a replacement for the PowerShot G7, because both have the same no-viewfinder, no-hot-shoe form factor.


The M series uses Powershot menus/software afterall.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2022)

The M6II is still being sold on the Canon Japan store.






ミラーレスカメラ「キヤノン EOS M6 Mark II」｜キヤノンオンラインショップ


｜キヤノンマーケティングジャパンが運営する公式通販サイトです。税込5,500円以上のご購入で送料無料。お買い物でポイントも貯まってお得。デジタルカメラ・交換レンズ・プリンター・各種アクセサリー・消耗品・パーツ等を取り扱っています。




store.canon.jp





Individual geographies set their prices (based on HQ guidance) and product mix. If ‘reports from two different countries’ doesn’t include Canon's home country, then it's not really discontinued by Canon. It just means that local Canon management in a couple of countries have decided to stop selling it. Which countries? CRguy doesn't say. Maybe Tuvalu and Liechtenstein.

Regardless, it doesn't mean the EOS M6 II has been discontinued by Canon. Or if you believe that two countries deciding to stop selling the M6 II means that it is discontinued, then you must also believe that because the M2 was not sold in USA or Canada, the M2 was never made by Canon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> I can't remember the last time that Canon acknowledged the existence of M. It's never mentioned in their financial documents. It wasn't even mentioned in their "Canon EOS System celebrates 35th anniversary" press release. I want M to continue, but it looks pretty bleak.


As I pointed out previously, Canon doesn't mention DSLRs in their financial materials either. But Canon DLSRs comprise about 25% of all ILCs shipped across the industry over the past couple of years, and close to half of the ILCs that Canon sold last year were DSLRs.

Financial reporting is mainly aimed at analysts, and they care about what's next not what is in the past. FF MILCs are the growing market, and thus the focus of IR reports. If you look at Toyota's financials, I doubt you'll see any discussion of the gas-powered Corolla. That doesn't mean Toyota is going to stop selling them.


----------



## reefroamer (May 4, 2022)

john1970 said:


> Suggests that Canon is adopting the APSC format into the EOS R system and discontinuing the EF-M system. Frankly makes sense from a business perspective.


We just don’t know. 

Just as easily suggests Canon is abandoning APS-C format entirely to further focus on FF MILC. Frankly it may make just as much sense from a business perspective. It could also suggest there will never be an APS-C R7.


----------



## John Wilde (May 4, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> As I pointed out previously, Canon doesn't mention DSLRs in their financial materials either. But Canon DLSRs comprise about 25% of all ILCs shipped across the industry over the past couple of years, and close to half of the ILCs that Canon sold last year were DSLRs.


I doubt that Canon will ever release a "new improved" DSLR. They will most likely just let that product line slowly wither away. In 2021 (CIPA) , DSLR revenue (yen) was -5.7%, and mirrorless revenue was +34.1%.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> I doubt that Canon will ever release a "new improved" DSLR. They will most likely just let that product line slowly wither away. In 2021 (CIPA) , DSLR revenue (yen) was -5.7%, and mirrorless revenue was +34.1%.


The 6% y/y drop resulted in a 2021 DSLR market of $700M, Canon's share of which is ~$420M. It would not surprise me to see Canon release a new, entry-level DSLR. That's a pretty big market to let wither, and there's plenty of 90D tech that can trickle down to a new xxxD body to minimize development costs.


----------



## Del Paso (May 4, 2022)

Should I get a compact APS/C from Fuji or Sony?
Not very convincing, I just hate their ergonomics and menus. And MFTs are simply too small to handle, even though the OM 1 seems really interesting, the lenses too.
Or a Canon G5X Mk.II ?


----------



## lote82 (May 4, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> I doubt that Canon will ever release a "new improved" DSLR. They will most likely just let that product line slowly wither away. In 2021 (CIPA) , DSLR revenue (yen) was -5.7%, and mirrorless revenue was +34.1%.


Yes, just exchange "DSLR" with "M" and you have the next likely prediction!


----------



## lote82 (May 4, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> Should I get a compact APS/C from Fuji or Sony?
> Not very convincing, I just hate their ergonomics and menus. And MFTs are simply too small to handle, even though the OM 1 seems really interesting, the lenses too.


Don't worry... R will deliver!


----------



## Del Paso (May 4, 2022)

lote82 said:


> Yes, just exchange "DSLR" with "M" and you have the next likely prediction!


You just ruined my naive hopes of a 5 DIV and a M5 II.
Howl, cry, weep and sob...


----------



## Del Paso (May 4, 2022)

lote82 said:


> Don't worry... R will deliver!


Rather a Q2  (47 MP, superb lens...)


----------



## SteveC (May 4, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> You just ruined my naive hopes of a 5 DIV and a M5 II.
> Howl, cry, weep and sob...


I was one of those waiting for the M5 II. Eventually I gave up and bought the M6 II. I put a viewfinder on it. Since I never use the hotshoe for anything else anyway, it's no biggie. And I'm glad I got it; it's a very convenient package especially for air travel. my 18-200 (Tamron) and the wide angle (10-22? I don't recall off hand) cover all bases.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2022)

SteveC said:


> I was one of those waiting for the M5 II. Eventually I gave up and bought the M6 II. I put a viewfinder on it. Since I never use the hotshoe for anything else anyway, it's no biggie. And I'm glad I got it; it's a very convenient package especially for air travel. my 18-200 (Tamron) and the wide angle (10-22? I don't recall off hand) cover all bases.


What do you think of the Tamron 18-200? I sometimes travel with the M6, M18-150, M11-22, and M22/2. On occasion, the extra 50mm would come in handy (not handy enough to make me bring the M18-55 + M55-200 instead of the M18-150, but I might consider the Tamron). 

As a side note, Tamron was founded long before personal computers so they had no way of predicting the fact that autocorrect changes the 'r' to a 'p'.


----------



## scyrene (May 4, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> With no rumoured successor, we think that this may be the biggest sign yet that the EOS M system is going to be phased out in favour of an RF mount APS-C camera line.


She's reaching, your Honor.


----------



## yungfat (May 4, 2022)

Kit Chan said:


> If they don't follow up with an M7 announcement that'll solidify my decision to change to Fuji. I don't want a bulky FF mount on an APS-C camera.


I had the same thinking and I went to Fuji X-T3, but I can’t deal with the Fuji color, ended up sold it.


----------



## John Wilde (May 4, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 6% y/y drop resulted in a 2021 DSLR market of $700M, Canon's share of which is ~$420M. It would not surprise me to see Canon release a new, entry-level DSLR. That's a pretty big market to let wither, and there's plenty of 90D tech that can trickle down to a new xxxD body to minimize development costs.


The long-term trend for DSLRs doesn't look good. (Click on CIPA graphic to enlarge.)


----------



## yungfat (May 4, 2022)

I am just like many others who “watching” M6II since its announced but hardly make purchase decision due to uncertainty future of the Canon M series.
Really tempting for M series smaller lenses, if Canon gonna build a small R body (smaller than RP) with few small zoom and prime pancake lens, I believe many M “watchers” will jump into it.
Come on Canon, you could make a small RF 50mm f1.8, EF 40mm f2.8 pancake ane EF-S 24mm f2.8, I know you could did the same or better for RF mount. 
I had the M5 in the past, sold it to my good friend, and I own the RP, RP isn’t too much larger than M5, I expect a RF mount APSC body could be smaller or at least maintain the same size just like the M series body.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> The long-term trend for DSLRs doesn't look good. (Click on CIPA graphic to enlarge.)


Agreed, but the 20% of a market may be worth modest investment to maintain. Especially given IR comments about the low end of the market 'bottoming out'.


----------



## unfocused (May 4, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The 6% y/y drop resulted in a 2021 DSLR market of $700M, Canon's share of which is ~$420M. It would not surprise me to see Canon release a new, entry-level DSLR. That's a pretty big market to let wither, and there's plenty of 90D tech that can trickle down to a new xxxD body to minimize development costs.


On the other hand, Canon might simply start reducing DSLR prices to spike sales.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2022)

unfocused said:


> On the other hand, Canon might simply start reducing DSLR prices to spike sales.


Could be. Might depend on how significantly DSLR production has been affected by current component supply constraints.


----------



## Czardoom (May 4, 2022)

pzyber said:


> It's not listed as discontinued by Canon Japan yet.
> Maybe only in certain markets?


Or maybe it's just a rumor. And that's all it will be until Canon says it is discontinued.

Rumor sites jut love to discontinue items. Some of them - miraculously - turn out to not be discontinued after all.


----------



## Czardoom (May 4, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> ...and even the news of the discontinued M6 II.


It's not news, it's a rumor. And even if they stop making new ones, you can buy one and it will last for years. If you are interested in small and light, and the system has the lenses you want, then it doesn't matter if they stop making new M6 II's.

While everyone is pronouncing the system dead, I would say that the M6, with it's higher MP sensor and better AF system, was an outlier anyway. If Canon says the M50 is discontinued, then that's another story.


----------



## Czardoom (May 4, 2022)

Of course the sad thing is, we know that other internet sites just repeat what is published on CR. It wouldn't surprise me if other photo sites are already reporting that the M6 II has been discontinued - even though CR doesn't know if this is actually fact or not.

And that, my friends, IS TOTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE. The headline could just as easily have read...

TWO COUNTRIES REPORT THE M6 II AS DISCONTINUED. Reads a little differently, doesn't it. 

Shame on CR for trying to kill the M system, which it has been trying to do for years with this - as of yet - un-factual heaadline. I guess ethics don't matter to some.


----------



## lustyd (May 4, 2022)

Glad I just bought mine if this is true. As a long term Canon user I had decided to buy the Sony ZX-E10 due to its size and the fact that it can do video very well (longer than 30 minutes for instance...Canon that's a hint!). Sony stopped making them and I tried a ZV1 which was good but slow compared to my 90D or other canons, which makes it frustrating to use. I ended up buying the M6ii since it's basically a 90D in a more convenient form factor and it's perfect (albeit still 30 minute limits for no reason).
I get frustrated at the full frame brigade who always completely ignore form factor. I definitely won't have a full frame sized kit on me to capture stuff so I'll never invest in a system like that. The 90D and EF/EF-S lenses are simply too large to be convenient. If they switch to R series then they'd need to release a complete new range of ultra compact lenses to get my business, and I don't mean EF-S equivalent I mean EF-M equivalent. What would be the point? Given the existance of EF converters I really don't see what else is needed on M so don't buy the lack of development stuff either. If I want a specific lens I can get one, just not in a small M format. The most popular options are all there and always have been.
Most of the issues with M series are lazy journalism where advantages are discussed as if they were flaws. I've yet to see an M review that acknowledged the purpose of M, they instead like to compare to 1Dx and highlight every apparent shortcoming a pro photographer might miss.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> Of course the sad thing is, we know that other internet sites just repeat what is published on CR. It wouldn't surprise me if other photo sites are already reporting that the M6 II has been discontinued - even though CR doesn't know if this is actually fact or not.
> 
> And that, my friends, IS TOTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE. The headline could just as easily have read...
> 
> ...


Indeed. 

And which two countries? If the information is bona fide, that information is certainly relevant. For example, if Canon is no longer selling the M6 II in Russia and Belarus, that reads even more differently.


----------



## scyrene (May 4, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> I believe it's about time Canon inform us about the M's future.
> Presently, I wouldn't dare to invest in this system, there are just too many contradictory news about it. On the one hand, sales are high, on the other hand no novelties and even the news of the discontinued M6 II. I too was waiting for an M 5II...
> Sorry Canon, but customers like to know what's going on. Nobody asks Canon to divulge some classified info.
> But we'd like to know whether it makes sense to spend our hard-earned money on a system that could be obsolete soon.


With respect, you're not "investing" in a system, you're buying a camera and one or more lenses. It does its job and isn't obsolete the moment it's discontinued. If a given body or system suits your needs, and you can afford it, get it. You're overcomplicating it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 4, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> Presently, I wouldn't dare to invest in this system, there are just too many contradictory news about it.
> Sorry Canon, but customers like to know what's going on.


Yes, and you are a frequent participant in a forum discussing rumors about the newest camera gear.

I suspect most buyers of M-series cameras just walk into a store or search on Amazon and buy the camera. They don’t spend hours or days researching the brand, the line, or rumors about its potential demise or growth. It’s clear from Canon’s milestones that most buyers never buy a lens other than the 1-2 that came in the box with their camera.


----------



## Bob Howland (May 4, 2022)

scyrene said:


> With respect, you're not "investing" in a system, you're buying a camera and one or more lenses. It does its job and isn't obsolete the moment it's discontinued. If a given body or system suits your needs, and you can afford it, get it. You're overcomplicating it.


Maybe or maybe not! Not everybody buys a body and 2 lenses, then calls it quits. I bought my first EOS camera in 1997, 25 years ago, then bought an f/2.8 trinity over the next two years, then a 100 macro and a 100-400. That's five lenses, including 4 L's, purchased over a 4 year period. Plus four TS-E lenses, five high speed primes, a 300 /2.8, a Sigma 150-600 and 4 more film and DSLR bodies. That's "investing". The difference is that I view Canon etc as a mortal enemy and don't expect them to tell me their future plans.


----------



## josephandrews222 (May 4, 2022)

...the abbreviation 'JDM' has relevance that pertains to my most recent watch purchase--Japan Domestic Market (only).

I love the watch--solar powered, radio controlled, titanium, sapphire, analog-digital, compass, barometer etc.

The exact watch I purchased (via eBay) is not available in North America.

I will not hesitate to purchase EOS Ms etc. the same way.

In fact, I already have!

And remember, Canon USA opted out of the M2 all those years ago--I bought that body via eBay...from Japan.

And the EF-M 11-22 IS lenses in our family? Two were purchased from Canada...during the period of time that Canon USA pretended that it didn't exist.

=====

I remain flabbergasted that Canon would even consider ceding the entire (interchangeable lens) cropped sensor market to their competition.

It does not make sense.


----------



## scyrene (May 4, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Maybe or maybe not! Not everybody buys a body and 2 lenses, then calls it quits. I bought my first EOS camera in 1997, 25 years ago, then bought an f/2.8 trinity over the next two years, then a 100 macro and a 100-400. That's five lenses, including 4 L's, purchased over a 4 year period. Plus four TS-E lenses, five high speed primes, a 300 /2.8, a Sigma 150-600 and 4 more film and DSLR bodies. That's "investing". The difference is that I view Canon etc as a mortal enemy and don't expect them to tell me their future plans.


Lol. But once again, you're not really investing. You're buying something that will lose value over time, because it does what you want. We can use the word as a simple synonym for 'purchase' but I think the waters become muddied when people imply that the future trajectory of a brand or line affects that purchase. It's not like buying shares in a company and hoping their forecasts or performance increase the value of those shares.


----------



## lustyd (May 4, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yes, and you are a frequent participant in a forum discussing rumors about the newest camera gear.
> 
> I suspect most buyers of M-series cameras just walk into a store or search on Amazon and buy the camera. They don’t spend hours or days researching the brand, the line, or rumors about its potential demise or growth. It’s clear from Canon’s milestones that most buyers never buy a lens other than the 1-2 that came in the box with their camera.


Probably most, yes I think you're right. I searched for months though for cameras without a viewfinder either adding bulk or in a very weird position, with lenses that were portable yet wide enough for vlogging and landscape, external mic input, vertical screen (fully articulating causes creepy eye movements on video). In fact, the only consideration I ignored was price. For some reason the whole industry things smaller should mean cheaper.
Every single one of my requirements is seen as bad by the press yet it doesn't take more than 5 minutes research to see I'm far from alone. It may not be extravagant, but I bought a 90D and everything about it is a bit bad for what I wanted so I had to upgrade to an M6ii which was cheaper for no reason at all that I could see. I have a range of EF and EF-S lenses as well as now a range of portable M lenses. Perhaps I'm not the target demographic, but I'm a demographic that's being pushed out of the Canon ecosystem by people who wish every camera had a massive integrated grip and used foot long lenses. For the record I also don't see why integrated grips would add thousands to the camera cost!


----------



## entoman (May 4, 2022)

yungfat said:


> I am just like many others who “watching” M6II since its announced but hardly make purchase decision due to uncertainty future of the Canon M series.
> Really tempting for M series smaller lenses, if Canon gonna build a small R body (smaller than RP) with few small zoom and prime pancake lens, I believe many M “watchers” will jump into it.
> Come on Canon, you could make a small RF 50mm f1.8, EF 40mm f2.8 pancake ane EF-S 24mm f2.8, I know you could did the same or better for RF mount.
> I had the M5 in the past, sold it to my good friend, and I own the RP, RP isn’t too much larger than M5, I expect a RF mount APSC body could be smaller or at least maintain the same size just like the M series body.


I wouldn't delay a purchase decision on the basis that a product could be discontinued. If you really like a camera, just go out and buy it. And if affordable, get a couple of extra lenses at the same time. The camera will still work perfectly in 10 years time, and there will vast numbers of mint condition secondhand lenses available for many years to come - especially if other folk sell off their M lenses.

IMO, the only valid reason for NOT buying, is if you feel there are features missing in the M6ii that you genuinely need, that might find their way into an RF replacement (e.g. IBIS, fully articulated screen, AI tech).


----------



## entoman (May 4, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Not everybody buys a body and 2 lenses, then calls it quits. I bought my first EOS camera in 1997, 25 years ago, then bought an f/2.8 trinity over the next two years, then a 100 macro and a 100-400. That's five lenses, including 4 L's, purchased over a 4 year period. Plus four TS-E lenses, five high speed primes, a 300 /2.8, a Sigma 150-600 and 4 more film and DSLR bodies.


I'd guess that 90% or more of M buyers just buy the camera with the kit lens, or maybe a 2 or 3 lenses plus body - much the same as typical buyers of Rebels. Most buyers will either be novices attracted by a nicely designed camera body, or people who already own a decent DSLR or RF outfit, but fancy a same-brand compact model that they can use in situations where a larger camera is inappropriate. I don't think there will be many M owners who have, or want, a large collection of specialised lenses.

High-end DSLR and RF users are a different breed and have chosen those cameras because of their amazing versatility, so they'll be far more likely to "invest" in a couple of bodies and half a dozen lenses, IMO.

There are of course exceptions - people who will want a very capable camera and a full set of lenses, but also need or want the system to be small and light. But they'll be buying Olympus, not M.


----------



## Bob Howland (May 4, 2022)

scyrene said:


> Lol. But once again, you're not really investing. You're buying something that will lose value over time, because it does what you want. We can use the word as a simple synonym for 'purchase' but I think the waters become muddied when people imply that the future trajectory of a brand or line affects that purchase. It's not like buying shares in a company and hoping their forecasts or performance increase the value of those shares.


But doing what I've done requires stability and long term commitment from the manufacturer. That's what we're not seeing from Canon WRT the M system. Also I forgot to mention that in the last two years, I replaced my 20 year old trinity with a new F/4 trinity and my 100 macro with the latest and greatest. I'm getting old and want to lighten my load.


----------



## Del Paso (May 4, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yes, and you are a frequent participant in a forum discussing rumors about the newest camera gear.
> 
> I suspect most buyers of M-series cameras just walk into a store or search on Amazon and buy the camera. They don’t spend hours or days researching the brand, the line, or rumors about its potential demise or growth. It’s clear from Canon’s milestones that most buyers never buy a lens other than the 1-2 that came in the box with their camera.


You got a point here.
Maybe I'm just a bit frustrated because I've been hoping for a high IQ M with an integrated EVF, and nothing seems to come.
I'm sometimes fed up with carrying 14 Kg on my back ...so, a cute little M with 3-5 lenses would have made me happy.


----------



## imez007 (May 4, 2022)

EOS M series is small, light weight and with an APSC size sensor. I used to have the original M and now M200 for travel. BTW, I have a few RF lenses on an R for pro use, but not for travel. If there is a new APSC R series with a large body, heavy weight but with a small sensor, I do not get the idea.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 4, 2022)

lote82 said:


> As I already stated I only see two APS-C options for Canon:
> 1. APS-C in R-system.
> 2. No APS-C anymore.
> Hope for 1.


As much as I've been an APS-C shooter in the past, since transitioning to full frame, I can't realistically say I'd ever willingly go back to APS-C. The EOS RP is inexpensive enough and small enough that anybody who is looking to upgrade from a basic point and shoot or cameraphone would be hard pressed not to at least consider it. Coupled with the RF 50 1.8 and/or the 24-105 f/4-7.1 it's not quite as small as an M body, but it's not far off. 

I'm sure Canon meant for the RP to be that natural upgrade path because the RP uses the same battery type as M cameras, so I'm not surprised in the least if it turns out that Canon is ceding APS-C to the likes of Fuji, etc and focusing on just full frame. There's no real reason why they wouldn't be able to make an even smaller version of the RP with a FF sensor in it if it's going to have an RF mount. The physical mount alone is going to limit how small they can make the body, and looking at my RP, it can't really get that much smaller than it already is without running into the lens mount.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 5, 2022)

yungfat said:


> I am just like many others who “watching” M6II since its announced but hardly make purchase decision due to uncertainty future of the Canon M series.
> Really tempting for M series smaller lenses, if Canon gonna build a small R body (smaller than RP) with few small zoom and prime pancake lens, I believe many M “watchers” will jump into it.
> Come on Canon, you could make a small RF 50mm f1.8, EF 40mm f2.8 pancake ane EF-S 24mm f2.8, I know you could did the same or better for RF mount.
> I had the M5 in the past, sold it to my good friend, and I own the RP, RP isn’t too much larger than M5, I expect a RF mount APSC body could be smaller or at least maintain the same size just like the M series body.


I have both the M5 and an RP. Sitting them side by side, the m5 is actually taller than the RP. The RP is a little wider, and deeper, but not by much, and even more interestingly, the RP with the RF 50 STM lens weighs a whopping 5 ounces more than the M5 with the 21 STM lens. The RP is already very close to flagship M size and could pretty easily get a slight shave here and there to get it even more svelte.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 5, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The M6II is still being sold on the Canon Japan store.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I concur. A rumour is just that. Generally when Canon discontinues an item in the market, it is backed up by website information for a particular geography with Canon Japan's website being the ultimate source and nothing has been provided by CR Guy

An alternative hypothesis is if Canon has internally decided to discontinue the M6ii (ie nothing on Canon country XX website) then it could mean a M6iii is going to be released soon


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Maybe or maybe not! Not everybody buys a body and 2 lenses, then calls it quits. I bought my first EOS camera in 1997, 25 years ago, then bought an f/2.8 trinity over the next two years, then a 100 macro and a 100-400. That's five lenses, including 4 L's, purchased over a 4 year period. Plus four TS-E lenses, five high speed primes, a 300 /2.8, a Sigma 150-600 and 4 more film and DSLR bodies. That's "investing". The difference is that I view Canon etc as a mortal enemy and don't expect them to tell me their future plans.


Canon's announcements of milestones (i.e. xx millions of EOS bodies or EF lenses sold) and the years those announcements were made make it clear that they sell 1.4 lenses for every body. Looking on sales ranking sites from various countries, it's apparent that two-lens kits are popular choices for entry-level bodies, and typically APS-C cameras compose close to 90% of the ILC market. So, simple math says that _most_ buyers of M- and xxxD/Rebel-series cameras buy a body with one or two lenses and calls it quits.

Also, as @scyrene points out, spending a lot of money on something isn't the same as investing. If you're a professional photographer, it's reasonable to claim you’re investing, but that would be investment in your business, not in Canon gear. The only people actually investing in Canon are CAJ shareholders.


----------



## SteveC (May 5, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> What do you think of the Tamron 18-200? I sometimes travel with the M6, M18-150, M11-22, and M22/2. On occasion, the extra 50mm would come in handy (not handy enough to make me bring the M18-55 + M55-200 instead of the M18-150, but I might consider the Tamron).
> 
> As a side note, Tamron was founded long before personal computers so they had no way of predicting the fact that autocorrect changes the 'r' to a 'p'.


I like it. I should note that I bought the one with the native EF-M mount after dealing with an EF-S version on an adapater. The EF-S version was noisy for cinema, the EF-M one is quieter.

I haven't done any sort of pixel peeping--not that you would care about that, or any other sort of detailed analysis.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 5, 2022)

lustyd said:


> Probably most, yes I think you're right. I searched for months though for cameras without a viewfinder either adding bulk or in a very weird position, with lenses that were portable yet wide enough for vlogging and landscape, external mic input, vertical screen (fully articulating causes creepy eye movements on video). In fact, the only consideration I ignored was price. For some reason the whole industry things smaller should mean cheaper.
> Every single one of my requirements is seen as bad by the press yet it doesn't take more than 5 minutes research to see I'm far from alone. It may not be extravagant, but I bought a 90D and everything about it is a bit bad for what I wanted so I had to upgrade to an M6ii which was cheaper for no reason at all that I could see. I have a range of EF and EF-S lenses as well as now a range of portable M lenses. Perhaps I'm not the target demographic, but I'm a demographic that's being pushed out of the Canon ecosystem by people who wish every camera had a massive integrated grip and used foot long lenses. For the record I also don't see why integrated grips would add thousands to the camera cost!


Have you considered the Sigma fp L?
- no viewfinder (can be added but to the side and not the top of the body)
- L mount for lenses
- very small but the price is not cheap at USD2.5k ($3k with viewfinder)
- no external mic unless via external recorder
- fixed rear screen


----------



## Kit Chan (May 5, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> I have both the M5 and an RP. Sitting them side by side, the m5 is actually taller than the RP. The RP is a little wider, and deeper, but not by much, and even more interestingly, the RP with the RF 50 STM lens weighs a whopping 5 ounces more than the M5 with the 21 STM lens. The RP is already very close to flagship M size and could pretty easily get a slight shave here and there to get it even more svelte.
> View attachment 203409
> 
> View attachment 203410
> ...


RF doesn't seem to be quite as big as I imagined. So maybe I would be happy with an 'R7' after all.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 5, 2022)

Kit Chan said:


> RF doesn't seem to be quite as big as I imagined. So maybe I would be happy with an 'R7' after all.


The RP is a very small camera compared to the other RF bodies. I personally prefer the larger grip of the RP over the M5, but that's because I have gorilla hands. My RP is my goto every day carry and it's been wonderful with the 50 STM, though I do wish canon would make an RF version of the pancake 40. On the RP that would be pretty boss. At any rate, the camera, plus the 50 STM lens and the battery charger fit in a nice small carry bag that I can put either in my backpack or luggage. With the 1.6 crop mode on the camera I basically have two lenses with just the one prime. The only thing canon could really do is make even smaller and lighter lenses for RF to go with a small and light body like the RP.


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 5, 2022)

Funny how when many folks talk about travel they want the smaller sensor, less advanced camera with them yet when I travel it's to locales with spectacular beauty, interesting vistas...you get the idea. That's why I travel with the best gear I have, weight be damned. Unless of course it has been decided and discussed with the powers that be which state no one shall lag behind composing, framing or seeking particular light and therefore take the damn picture with the ipohne 12.


----------



## Bob Howland (May 5, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I concur. A rumour is just that. Generally when Canon discontinues an item in the market, it is backed up by website information for a particular geography with Canon Japan's website being the ultimate source and nothing has been provided by CR Guy
> 
> An alternative hypothesis is if Canon has internally decided to discontinue the M6ii (ie nothing on Canon country XX website) then it could mean a M6iii is going to be released soon


There are lots of possible explanations and none of us knows which one(s) are true.


----------



## Bob Howland (May 5, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> I have both the M5 and an RP. Sitting them side by side, the m5 is actually taller than the RP. The RP is a little wider, and deeper, but not by much, and even more interestingly, the RP with the RF 50 STM lens weighs a whopping 5 ounces more than the M5 with the 21 STM lens. The RP is already very close to flagship M size and could pretty easily get a slight shave here and there to get it even more svelte.


I own an R5 and have used an RP. The RP is about as small as I want to go. On the other hand, I like the size of the M system lenses.


----------



## unfocused (May 5, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Funny how when many folks talk about travel they want the smaller sensor, less advanced camera with them yet when I travel it's to locales with spectacular beauty, interesting vistas...you get the idea. That's why I travel with the best gear I have, weight be damned. Unless of course it has been decided and discussed with the powers that be which state no one shall lag behind composing, framing or seeking particular light and therefore take the damn picture with the ipohne 12.


This is always a dilemma with travel photography. 

Although I don't pretend to be successful, I try to keep in mind: 

1) My picture of "choose the iconic landmark" is not going to be better or different from the literally millions of other photos of the same place.
2) I am here to enjoy the experience. Photography can make the experience better or it can make it worse. If I become a slave to the pictures, it can be much worse,
3) Is my photography making the experience of my companions better or worse?

I'm fortunate, because my wife is also a photographer. However, our usual travel companions have zero interest in photography. Our compromise is to carve out some time for serious photography and then reserve most days for simply enjoying the trip and taking snapshots. Fortunately our companions are not early risers, so my wife and I can usually spend a few mornings out taking pictures and then still have most of the day to do group activities. Similarly, when they are ready to wrap up by mid-afternoon, we can spend some time taking pictures as the light improves. 

Finally, now that we are mostly retired, we can schedule a few trips a year to chase birds or otherwise pursue photographs and then reserve our "vacations" for mostly relaxing.


----------



## Madbox (May 5, 2022)

I guess that imaging sensor and manufacturing line will be updated and repurposed for a mystery rumor camera.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> There are lots of possible explanations and none of us knows which one(s) are true.


Of course... this is a rumours site after all!
The discourse is all about looking at the available information, try to make informed guesses (conclusions) and debate them. I believe that discontinuation is an opportunity to release a new body. That didn't happen with the 7Dii but has with 3 versions of the 1DX, 4 of the 5D (+R/SR), and 2 M6 bodies so far.
Releasing a new M body would quieten the "M ecosystem is dead" chorus though.


----------



## lote82 (May 5, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Funny how when many folks talk about travel they want the smaller sensor, less advanced camera with them yet when I travel it's to locales with spectacular beauty, interesting vistas...you get the idea. That's why I travel with the best gear I have, weight be damned. Unless of course it has been decided and discussed with the powers that be which state no one shall lag behind composing, framing or seeking particular light and therefore take the damn picture with the ipohne 12.


That's true if your goal is to take the best possible landscape photo and nothing else!

The first problem with travel photographing is that it can be anything (landscape, street, portrait, wedding, macro, wildlife ...) regarding your interests. Therefore you have to compromise.

The second problem is, that you (probably) also want to relax and enjoy vacation a bit. Walking through the (for ex.) rainforest while having big, heavy (and expensive) photo-gear with you can be quite annoying.
Therefore you have to compromise.

The third (and maybe the biggest) problem are your travel companions. unfocused already described that problem very well!
Therefore you also have to compromise.

For me personally (while traveling with my family) it's a tough decision finding the right balance between being a good father and a selfish photographing ass.


----------



## lustyd (May 5, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Have you considered the Sigma fp L?
> - no viewfinder (can be added but to the side and not the top of the body)
> - L mount for lenses
> - very small but the price is not cheap at USD2.5k ($3k with viewfinder)
> ...


Fixed rear screen and no external mic are deal breakers for me, even assuming there were compact lenses for the full frame sensor (I'm not familiar with L mount, so maybe there are)


----------



## lustyd (May 5, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> View attachment 203411


It's funny because you posted this to suggest these are similar and I see something completely different. Where you see two compact cameras I see one compact (actually I think that's pretty bulky compared to my M6ii) and one quite large and bulky one. Where you see a slight difference in size, I see a big trade off between camera gear and bag space for things like food and water. You even chose one of the most compact RF lenses to make your point. Show us the M series with 11-22 next to the R series with 15-35 and you may start to see the problem. In this scenario just the lenses will be 21oz difference, and I can tell you that holding 21oz at arms length for any amount of time is not fun. 

I don't think anyone here is suggesting that everyone needs small and compact cameras, it'd just be nice that you don't try to kill off the stuff other people need because you don't need it.


----------



## RexxReviews (May 5, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> I don't like this news.
> Because I cannot imagine if and what consequences this means to the EOS M system.
> I am no M owner. But if I was to get one body It would have been the M6 II. Because I like the idea of the optional EVF.
> 
> Edit: In Germany almost every shop has it on stock.


EOS-M was a waste to begin with, the M50 was the only reason the M line had even a SMALL significance. Canon hasn't made a new M lens since when? We knew this was going to happen at some point., If they can finally have all cameras using the same mount that lets then not have to split workloads. There have already been enough rumors that canon was making a small, no EVF RF mount camera so it wont Suprise me if we see something around the size of the M6MKII. Time for me to sell my M6 before the value drops too much. I have only used it as a webcam for the last year.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (May 5, 2022)

I’ve always had the feeling that Canon never had much love for the M system. R system is where it’s at..


----------



## lustyd (May 5, 2022)

RexxReviews said:


> EOS-M was a waste to begin with, the M50 was the only reason the M line had even a SMALL significance. Canon hasn't made a new M lens since when? We knew this was going to happen at some point., If they can finally have all cameras using the same mount that lets then not have to split workloads. There have already been enough rumors that canon was making a small, no EVF RF mount camera so it wont Suprise me if we see something around the size of the M6MKII. Time for me to sell my M6 before the value drops too much. I have only used it as a webcam for the last year.


Specifically what lens do you feel was missing that would fit into the M form factor? Those wanting lenses with specific features had all of the EF mounts available which offered better speed, better zoom, better kudos, whatever, but all of thoe things were a trade-off from the purpose of the M system which was its size. Every lens has the same diameter for a reason.

Some of that changes when EF is phased out, because RF can't be adapted. The answer isn't current RF lenses though, it's copying the M series lenses into the RF mount to keep M alive. Sure, replace the M6ii with an RM6 if you like, but it would need to have the exact same form factor as the M6ii and they'd then need to launch a large number of lenses the same as M already has. The only thing that would change is replacing compatibility with EF lenses with compatibility with RF lenses. But then they'd STILL need to launch RF-M as a thing because those little lenses won't work with full frame sensors


----------



## EOS 4 Life (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> The difference is that I view Canon etc as a mortal enemy


Then why buy from them at all?
I never really understood brand haters who buy the brand they hate


----------



## EOS 4 Life (May 5, 2022)

entoman said:


> High-end DSLR and RF users are a different breed and have chosen those cameras because of their amazing versatility, so they'll be far more likely to "invest" in a couple of bodies and half a dozen lenses, IMO.


If you are not a pro then you are not investing in anything.
These are depreciating assets.
If you are a pro then switching systems is a business decision.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> But doing what I've done requires stability and long term commitment from the manufacturer.


No camera maker is committed to anything.
If market conditions are bad enough they will drop anything that is not profitable.
They are under no contract or obligation.


----------



## entoman (May 5, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> If you are not a pro then you are not investing in anything.
> These are depreciating assets.
> If you are a pro then switching systems is a business decision.


Hence why I put "invest" in inverted commas


----------



## entoman (May 5, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Then why buy from them at all?
> I never really understood brand haters who buy the brand they hate


I never understand any kind of brand hater, or any other kind of hater, come to that....


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> But doing what I've done requires stability and long term commitment from the manufacturer. That's what we're not seeing from Canon WRT the M system. Also I forgot to mention that in the last two years, I replaced my 20 year old trinity with a new F/4 trinity and my 100 macro with the latest and greatest. I'm getting old and want to lighten my load.


The M series is consumer oriented. It’s a mature system, with a good selection of lenses for its target market. Canon doesn’t care if you personally invest in buy some M bodies and lenses. What sort of commitment are you looking for? 

You listed a bunch of L series lenses you’ve bought, all of those can be easily adapted to any Canon mirrorless body. That’s a form of commitment. 



Bob Howland said:


> I own an R5 and have used an RP. The RP is about as small as I want to go. On the other hand, I like the size of the M system lenses.


The size of the M series lenses is possible because of the smaller image circle _and_ smaller throat diameter of the mount. You’re not ever going to see RF lenses that small. 

Honestly, it sounds like by ‘commitment to the M series’ you mean that you want Canon to make a camera just for you – a bigger body than any other M to date that works with the small EF-M lenses. 

I know quite a few people who, when they found themselves unable to carry their large FF gear, switched to Fuji and were very happy. Maybe you should consider ‘investing’ in Fuji.


----------



## Bob Howland (May 5, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Then why buy from them at all?
> I never really understood brand haters who buy the brand they hate


Buyer-seller relationships are inherently adversarial. See _The Evolution of Cooperation_ by Robert Axelrod


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Buyer-seller relationships are inherently adversarial. See The _Evolution of Cooperation_ by Robert Axelrod


Then you must like Sony and Nikon. You’re not a customer of theirs, and the enemy of your enemy is your friend.


----------



## Bob Howland (May 5, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The M series is consumer oriented. It’s a mature system, with a good selection of lenses for its target market. Canon doesn’t care if you personally invest in buy some M bodies and lenses. What sort of commitment are you looking for?
> 
> You listed a bunch of L series lenses you’ve bought, all of those can be easily adapted to any Canon mirrorless body. That’s a form of commitment.
> 
> ...


Yep, you're right. Canon has done it better than anybody else over the last 40 years. Whoever designed the EOS communications protocol did a superb job, especially regarding extensibility.

Concerning the M system, I own an M5 and 4 lenses. I've pretty much given up on them. But why buy a small camera so I can put on an adapter and a big lens? I've decided to just suffer along. Buying an F/4 trinity was a big help and the R6 seems about the right size.

Regarding whether "investing" in a hobby makes sense, we'll just have to agree to disagree.


----------



## scyrene (May 5, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Funny how when many folks talk about travel they want the smaller sensor, less advanced camera with them yet when I travel it's to locales with spectacular beauty, interesting vistas...you get the idea. That's why I travel with the best gear I have, weight be damned. Unless of course it has been decided and discussed with the powers that be which state no one shall lag behind composing, framing or seeking particular light and therefore take the damn picture with the ipohne 12.


Appealing subjects are easy to get nice shots of. A phone will take a fine photo of a sunset in Venice. Higher level equipment shines where things are more challenging - smaller, further, poorer light, faster action.


----------



## scyrene (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Concerning the M system, I own an M5 and 4 lenses. I've pretty much given up on them. But why buy a small camera so I can put on an adapter and a big lens? I've decided to just suffer along. Buying an F/4 trinity was a big help and the R6 seems about the right size.


What lenses are missing that you'd want? Genuine question. And how many of them would be substantially smaller than an adapted EF equivalent?


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Yep, you're right. Canon has done it better than anybody else over the last 40 years. Whoever designed the EOS communications protocol did a superb job, especially regarding extensibility.
> 
> Concerning the M system, I own an M5 and 4 lenses. I've pretty much given up on them. But why buy a small camera so I can put on an adapter and a big lens? I've decided to just suffer along. Buying an F/4 trinity was a big help and the R6 seems about the right size.
> 
> Regarding whether "investing" in a hobby makes sense, we'll just have to agree to disagree.


The RF f/4 Trinity zoom is a fantastic set! I especially love the 70-200. My favorite version of all 6 70-200 L lenses I have owned over the years.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Concerning the M system, I own an M5 and 4 lenses. I've pretty much given up on them. But why buy a small camera so I can put on an adapter and a big lens?


Why given up? They have the same capabilities as the day you bought them, and those are solid capabilities. I have an M6 and all 8 EF-M lenses. I use them occasionally, which has been my pattern since buying them as a smaller kit to supplement to my FF kit.

I bought an M2 previously, and my teen daughter uses that with various lenses as well.


----------



## Bob Howland (May 5, 2022)

scyrene said:


> What lenses are missing that you'd want? Genuine question. And how many of them would be substantially smaller than an adapted EF equivalent?


I want what Olympus has. Neuro suggested I switch to Fuji. I'm much more likely to buy an OM-1 (or two) and their trinity of lenses.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2022)

scyrene said:


> Appealing subjects are easy to get nice shots of. A phone will take a fine photo of a sunset in Venice. Higher level equipment shines where things are more challenging - smaller, further, poorer light, faster action.


Agreed. When I travel somewhere I know I’ll want to take photos, I bring the gear that will deliver the best IQ available to me – FF camera with appropriate lenses. 

Traveling with family does require compromise. On those trips, I often bring the M kit for daytime since it fits easily in a backpack with other necessities. I also reserve some time for solo outings with the FF gear.


----------



## Danglin52 (May 5, 2022)

This may sound a bit cynical, but you are not going to get a lot of ROI on any camera unless you are a professional or enjoy shooting the camera. If you are satisfied with he lenses and accessories available form Canon and 3rd parties, stay with the M and enjoy the shooting experience. If there are capabilities you would upgrade for and they are not in the current M, move on to a new system. I have an M6 II + 18-150 and several of the Sigma primes that I plan to keep until it they die. My main cameras are the R3, R5 and RF lenses but I enjoy using the M when I want something light and to just have fun. With he ability to adapt EF glass, there is a wide selection of glass for the M (not as small as a dedicated lens). 

I think Canon will keep most of the M series in production until revenue begins to decline. The supply chain, staffing, manufacturing and many other considerations are driving companies to re-evaluate their product lines and focus where the have the best opportunity for return. 

If Canon produces an R7 I and it is 32mp or more I will pick one up for wildlife photography. I doubt I would buy a smaller profile APS-C R and would stick with the M6 II for travel and casual shooting. 

David


----------



## Danglin52 (May 5, 2022)

This may sound a bit cynical, but you are not going to get a lot of ROI on any camera "investment" unless you are a professional or derive pleasure from using the camera. If you are satisfied with he lenses and accessories available form Canon and 3rd parties, stay with the M and enjoy the shooting experience. If there are capabilities you would upgrade for and they are not in the current M, move on to a new system. I have an M6 II + 18-150 and several of the Sigma primes that I plan to keep until it they die. My main cameras are the R3, R5 and RF lenses but I enjoy using the M when I want something light and to just have fun. With he ability to adapt EF glass, there is a wide selection of glass for the M (not as small as a dedicated lens). 

I think Canon will keep most of the M series in production until revenue begins to decline. The supply chain, staffing, manufacturing and many other considerations are driving companies to re-evaluate their product lines and focus where the have the best opportunity for return. 

If Canon produces an R7 I and it is 32mp or more I will pick one up for wildlife photography. I doubt I would buy a smaller profile APS-C R and would stick with the M6 II for travel and casual shooting. 

David


----------



## John Wilde (May 5, 2022)

Canon is still having parts supply problems. They recently wrote:

"we prioritized the supply of high-end models such as the EOS R5 and EOS R6"


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> I own an R5 and have used an RP. The RP is about as small as I want to go. On the other hand, I like the size of the M system lenses.


I agree. I also have 2 R6s and an R5 and the RP (at least in terms of the grip) is about as small as I would prefer to go, though they could still trim here and there. Small light RF lenses would really be welcome. The RF 50 and 16 are both a good start, but smaller is better.


----------



## jam05 (May 5, 2022)

Ok. So two countries at war can not sell the M50 any more. Canon will never sell an apsc DSLR looking camera as well as the M50 or M6. Many consumers simply don't want anything that looks like a professional camera with them while traveling.


----------



## jam05 (May 5, 2022)

Don't want anything in my travel street bag that resembles an expensive pro camera.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 5, 2022)

lustyd said:


> It's funny because you posted this to suggest these are similar and I see something completely different. Where you see two compact cameras I see one compact (actually I think that's pretty bulky compared to my M6ii) and one quite large and bulky one. Where you see a slight difference in size, I see a big trade off between camera gear and bag space for things like food and water. You even chose one of the most compact RF lenses to make your point. Show us the M series with 11-22 next to the R series with 15-35 and you may start to see the problem. In this scenario just the lenses will be 21oz difference, and I can tell you that holding 21oz at arms length for any amount of time is not fun.
> 
> I don't think anyone here is suggesting that everyone needs small and compact cameras, it'd just be nice that you don't try to kill off the stuff other people need because you don't need it.


Perhaps I should put the RP next to an R5 or R6. I doubt it would change your mind, however, the size difference between the RP and other RF cameras is really significant. If you think the RP is big and bulky, the other RF cameras are outright monsters in comparison. The point I was trying to make was that if Canon really wanted to replace M with RF they're already not that far off with the RP. Doing APS-C just isn't that necessary to get a small camera.

I also don't disagree that M cameras and lenses are small. They should be. If Canon really wants to replace the M line, they'd do well to release some really small RF lenses and trim down the RP body even more. They started the RF line off with big heavy L line pro lenses, but it appears that they're starting to release smaller and lighter lenses as we see with the 50 and 16 RF lenses. BTW, they actually could make even smaller/shorter lenses than that, so I think in another year or so we'll see where this is really going.

All that said, I'm also a pretty firm believer that there is such a thing as too small. For example, my camera phone is rarely used for anything but casual snapshots. Why? It's too hard to hold it still and still get a shot that is shake free. I have gorilla hands, so I'm sure others have differing views on this, but for me personally, below a certain weight/size level my quality of photos goes down because the camera/photo platform is too small for me to effectively use.


----------



## Del Paso (May 5, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> I want what Olympus has. Neuro suggested I switch to Fuji. I'm much more likely to buy an OM-1 (or two) and their trinity of lenses.


Me too!
The OM1 has a lot of outstanding features, great weather resistance and a vast choice of sharp, luminous and compact lenses.


----------



## scyrene (May 5, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> All that said, I'm also a pretty firm believer that there is such a thing as too small. For example, my camera phone is rarely used for anything but casual snapshots. Why? It's too hard to hold it still and still get a shot that is shake free. I have gorilla hands, so I'm sure others have differing views on this, but for me personally, below a certain weight/size level my quality of photos goes down because the camera/photo platform is too small for me to effectively use.


I mean your hands might be big but then by definition most other people's will be smaller. "Too small" for you is likely larger than too small for many others. Incidentally, modern phones have excellent stabilisation, aided no doubt by having such small sensors. I find it a little odd to suggest hand holding a big, heavy body still is easier, but each to their own.


----------



## lustyd (May 5, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> Doing APS-C just isn't that necessary to get a small camera.


That’s just the thing though, it is necessary to make smaller lenses and since those lenses won’t work with FF sensors it makes no difference if it’s R or M mount you’d end up with the same exact lens range as M and the same bodies as M which makes all of the “M is dead” talk pointless. Canon have to either create a new identical line just to use the RF lenses or keep M as it is and carry on supporting EF for a while. Eventually they’ll do the former, I’m sure, and create RF-M lenses but right now it makes no sense to replace the entire M lineup for compatibility with lenses most M users don’t buy anyway. As you said, your body is only a little larger so people who want bigger lenses will already just buy that, the rest of us buy M on purpose for the small lens form factor.


----------



## kcimer (May 5, 2022)

Just a thought about M6 II being consumer only, not for pro users.
I have M6 II as a second camera. I use it for establishing shots (wide w/ 11-22mm) and for fun/specials (32mm 1.4, fisheye, circular fisheye) so I can keep the lens on the main camera. Reason being it is much faster than changing lenses, it is lighter around the neck tha FF counterpart, it is relatively cheap, has silent shutter (RP does silent only in Auto), comparative lenses are cheaper and lighter than FF, fun lenses are cheaper and with a converter I could use it as backup camera in a pinch (AF is much better than previous Ms and it does up to 14fps), not to mention travel and as inconspicious camera with near pro results. If you are on a tight budget - it is a really good solution.


----------



## lustyd (May 5, 2022)

scyrene said:


> . I find it a little odd to suggest hand holding a big, heavy body still is easier, but each to their own.


indeed, at arms length recording a 15 minute Vlog the opposite is true and most can’t hold the 2lbs steady. Sure, it works for taking photos close to the chest, but that’s just one quite niche use case in 2022


----------



## stevoc921 (May 5, 2022)

If I had to hazard a guess I'd say the mount will be killed shortly, but not the cameras themselves. I think the M cameras are likely going to be what replaces the Rebel line. I could see them changing the mount to "RF-S" mount, and having fewer models to choose from than the current M offering. Seems to me the M50/II has sold fairly well especially among beginner "creators" so why re-invent the wheel again when they already have mirrorless cameras to work with? Update the mount and be done with it. I have an M6 MK II with the 22mm f/2 and I love it. It's not my main camera, but it's what goes with me every day because it's so small, and if it gets dropped/lost/stolen it's not nearly as big of a deal as my "real" camera. I do love the fact that I can also slap a bigger EF lens on there if I want to and it's still more compact than my main camera with the same lens. However, I would LOVE even more to get the same size camera as an M6 MK II and be able to throw some of my EF or RF mount lenses on it.


----------



## stevoc921 (May 5, 2022)

kcimer said:


> Just a thought about M6 II being consumer only, not for pro users.
> I have M6 II as a second camera. I use it for establishing shots (wide w/ 11-22mm) and for fun/specials (32mm 1.4, fisheye, circular fisheye) so I can keep the lens on the main camera. Reason being it is much faster than changing lenses, it is lighter around the neck tha FF counterpart, it is relatively cheap, has silent shutter (RP does silent only in Auto), comparative lenses are cheaper and lighter than FF, fun lenses are cheaper and with a converter I could use it as backup camera in a pinch (AF is much better than previous Ms and it does up to 14fps), not to mention travel and as inconspicious camera with near pro results. If you are on a tight budget - it is a really good solution.


It really is a fantastic camera. I almost went with the RP, but it seemed more money than it was worth for the features it had compared to M6.


----------



## canonmike (May 5, 2022)

The 7D was a decent APSC camera and a body I often used, coupled to a 70-200 L lens to photograph my grandson's ballgames. That being said, it was too big and too heavy to take on hikes while doing trail maintenance. I cannot count the times I punished that combo, banging into trees, rock outcroppings and various other obstacles. When the M50 was introduced, I quickly purchased one and it became my regular trail camera. Compact, lightweight and quite capable, not to mention the ability to carry it handsfree, using a Peak Design bracket on my pack strap, made it my go to hiking camera. To this day it is still my cam of choice for the trail. While I may very well pick up an R7 for sports and wildlife photography, depending on how it specs out, it will never(subject to seeing its size) replace my M50 for hiking. The M50, coupled to an EF-M 22mm lens begs to be used under these circumstances, while the EOS 7D begged to be hidden inside an already heavy backpack, to keep it protected from the elements and being damaged. I don't see any R series body relegating my M50 to the pile of mothballs. I won't be upset If they do indeed, axe the M series line, because there will then surely be some bargain M series bodies out there, of which I am sure to pick one up as a back up. As a side note, I love my R6 body but SAWC prohibit me from carrying it while hiking. While very capable, full frame cameras are just too inconvenient for my POU on the trail.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2022)

scyrene said:


> I mean your hands might be big but then by definition most other people's will be smaller. "Too small" for you is likely larger than too small for many others. Incidentally, modern phones have excellent stabilisation, aided no doubt by having such small sensors. I find it a little odd to suggest hand holding a big, heavy body still is easier, but each to their own.


For holding something steady, having some mass can help. I can certainly see having difficulty holding a smartphone steady if one's hands have some tremor or if one has had too much coffee. Some extra mass adds some inertia and helps. Obviously too heavy is also not optimal, because muscles get tired.

For me, at least, it's more about comfort and balance. A body + lens of FF size/weight with a grip that accommodates my pinky finger is much more comfortable than having that finger rest under the camera base. That's less important with something from the M series, where the body + lens combo is much lighter. Balance is a big part of that as well. I usually use L-series lenses, and I find that a gripped body counterbalances the weight of an f/2.8 zoom much better than a non-gripped body. In that regard, for a lens like the 28-70/2 I find my R3 to be a bit light (the weight of the 1D X would give better balance). However, for the 70-200/2.8 the RF lens is much lighter than the EF version, and balances great with the R3. An unbalanced rig results in my hand being sore after a day of shooting, whereas with a balanced rig my hand is fine even if the total weight is greater.


----------



## Maximilian (May 5, 2022)

RexxReviews said:


> EOS-M was a waste to begin with ... Time for me to sell my M6 ...


Sounds like a disappointed user expecting more from a consumer system to become a pro system.



RexxReviews said:


> ... the M line had even a SMALL significance. ...


Maybe in your gear setup, maybe in your country. 
Looking at Japan an Asian sales numbers other people and in other countries opinions might differ. 



RexxReviews said:


> ... There have already been enough rumors that canon was making a small, no EVF RF mount camera ...


This has yet to be proven. I hope with you that this will come true, but for what price? 
Comparable price of the EOS M6 MkII?
And when it comes to size, I see almost NO - I repeat NO - RF lens coming close to EF-M lenses. 
And I see the RF 16 mm here as well!


So what are you looking for?


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 5, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> Perhaps I should put the RP next to an R5 or R6. I doubt it would change your mind, however, the size difference between the RP and other RF cameras is really significant. If you think the RP is big and bulky, the other RF cameras are outright monsters in comparison. The point I was trying to make was that if Canon really wanted to replace M with RF they're already not that far off with the RP. Doing APS-C just isn't that necessary to get a small camera.
> 
> I also don't disagree that M cameras and lenses are small. They should be. If Canon really wants to replace the M line, they'd do well to release some really small RF lenses and trim down the RP body even more. They started the RF line off with big heavy L line pro lenses, but it appears that they're starting to release smaller and lighter lenses as we see with the 50 and 16 RF lenses. BTW, they actually could make even smaller/shorter lenses than that, so I think in another year or so we'll see where this is really going.
> 
> All that said, I'm also a pretty firm believer that there is such a thing as too small. For example, my camera phone is rarely used for anything but casual snapshots. Why? It's too hard to hold it still and still get a shot that is shake free. I have gorilla hands, so I'm sure others have differing views on this, but for me personally, below a certain weight/size level my quality of photos goes down because the camera/photo platform is too small for me to effectively use.


After using a 5D3 for almost 10 years, my R6 is a wee thing in my mind.(and hands)


----------



## scyrene (May 5, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> For holding something steady, having some mass can help. I can certainly see having difficulty holding a smartphone steady if one's hands have some tremor or if one has had too much coffee. Some extra mass adds some inertia and helps. Obviously too heavy is also not optimal, because muscles get tired.
> 
> For me, at least, it's more about comfort and balance. A body + lens of FF size/weight with a grip that accommodates my pinky finger is much more comfortable than having that finger rest under the camera base. That's less important with something from the M series, where the body + lens combo is much lighter. Balance is a big part of that as well. I usually use L-series lenses, and I find that a gripped body counterbalances the weight of an f/2.8 zoom much better than a non-gripped body. In that regard, for a lens like the 28-70/2 I find my R3 to be a bit light (the weight of the 1D X would give better balance). However, for the 70-200/2.8 the RF lens is much lighter than the EF version, and balances great with the R3. An unbalanced rig results in my hand being sore after a day of shooting, whereas with a balanced rig my hand is fine even if the total weight is greater.


I guess I was interpreting them as comparing both at arm's length. Shooting a camera with the viewfinder against the eye certainly offers better stability, and holding a phone too far out is more shaky; I learned with DSLRs first, so I guess my technique is a hybrid. Best to clamp your elbows at your sides with a phone, especially for longer exposures. But the computational photography of modern phones makes it quite hard to induce motion blur in my experience.

With regard to balance: absolutely agreed, which is why I've never been drawn by the arguments that mirrorless must necessarily mean smaller and lighter bodies. I had an original M and the EF 100L was too big to use comfortably; although if I ever get an R body, I'd be aiming to swap a big L supertele for the 800 f/11, because I just don't want the bulk any more (in the past I imagined continuing to use the 500L).


----------



## kcimer (May 5, 2022)

scyrene said:


> What lenses are missing that you'd want? Genuine question. And how many of them would be substantially smaller than an adapted EF equivalent?


I would like to see (buy) replacement for 22mm f/2 - say 1.4 with excelent resolution and image quality like the 32mm f/1.4, something like 10-25mm f/4 to replace 11-22mm, and a nice standard zoom 16-50mm f/2.8.


----------



## InchMetric (May 5, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> Or maybe it's just a rumor. And that's all it will be until Canon says it is discontinued.
> 
> Rumor sites jut love to discontinue items. Some of them - miraculously - turn out to not be discontinued after all.


What would we do without people reminding us that we are hearing Canon rumors on a site called Canon Rumors?

It would be less of a cringe if you simply shared whether or not you agreed with the rumor.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 6, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> The RP is a very small camera compared to the other RF bodies. I personally prefer the larger grip of the RP over the M5, but that's because I have gorilla hands. My RP is my goto every day carry and it's been wonderful with the 50 STM, though I do wish canon would make an RF version of the pancake 40. On the RP that would be pretty boss.


Making a RF40mm pancake makes a lot of sense to me. It would be an excellent street combination and Canon does need to release more affordable RF lenses.
Adapting the EF40mm doubles the weight, size and cost (assuming you weld the adapter just for this lens).


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

kcimer said:


> I would like to see (buy) replacement for 22mm f/2 - say 1.4 with excelent resolution and image quality like the 32mm f/1.4, something like 10-25mm f/4 to replace 11-22mm, and a nice standard zoom 16-50mm f/2.8.


In the EF-S lineup, they replaced the 10-22mm with the slower, cheaper 10-18mm. The 17-55/2.8 was never updated. That is consistent with moving the APS-C DSLR line downmarket. 

The 32/1.4 is a very nice lens, though, and IIRC the most recently-released EF-M. It could be that Canon decides to move the M line upmarket with a small number of faster, high IQ lenses.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 6, 2022)

lustyd said:


> That’s just the thing though, it is necessary to make smaller lenses and since those lenses won’t work with FF sensors it makes no difference if it’s R or M mount you’d end up with the same exact lens range as M and the same bodies as M which makes all of the “M is dead” talk pointless. Canon have to either create a new identical line just to use the RF lenses or keep M as it is and carry on supporting EF for a while. Eventually they’ll do the former, I’m sure, and create RF-M lenses but right now it makes no sense to replace the entire M lineup for compatibility with lenses most M users don’t buy anyway. As you said, your body is only a little larger so people who want bigger lenses will already just buy that, the rest of us buy M on purpose for the small lens form factor.


Or they could keep the physical M mount and just add additional RF pins. All RF is, is EF plus some additional pins. EF-M is literally EF but a different physical mount. They could just keep everything the same and add the RF pins for newer lenses that have a control ring while keeping the same physical EF-M mount. That would mean they stay doing APS-C for EF-M (or maybe it'd be RF-M), but, plenty of pros would like a pro level APS-C body, so I don't doubt that we'll ultimately see APS-C in RF at some point.

It's really just a matter of what to do with EF-M:

1. do nothing, see what happens to the market, then take appropriate action (most likely)
2. Kill it off in favor of RF (Meh, like you said, a lot of it is about the smaller lenses).
3. Update it to have RF pins while keeping backward compatibility.
4. Do something none of us has thought they would do.

Canon has already demonstrated multiple times that they have no problem with introducing/maintaining multiple mounts if they think they can sell enough to make a profit. Contrary to what many on here think, none of Canon's EF-M bodies, or EF-M glass is aimed at pro level anything. It's clearly more consumer oriented, which in many ways frees them up to make it however it fits the target market best.

As nice as it'd be to have one mount for everything and one set of lenses for everything, the reality is, it's just not that simple.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 6, 2022)

lustyd said:


> indeed, at arms length recording a 15 minute Vlog the opposite is true and most can’t hold the 2lbs steady. Sure, it works for taking photos close to the chest, but that’s just one quite niche use case in 2022


It depends on what you're doing. I rarely do anything at arms length. If I'm not shooting a selfie type photo or video, I'm looking through the viewfinder, which means I have both hands on the camera and it's anchored to my face, even for shooting video. If I'm shooting a selfie type video, if you really want a smooth static shot, either perch the camera on something (or use a small tripod/monopod) or walk and talk. If you're walking, how stable does it need to be?

All that being said, yes, a larger body with a bigger grip (at least for me, again other people with different sized hands will be different) tends to be more stable, given the way I use it. Again, it may be different for other people, and that's totally fine.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 6, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> For holding something steady, having some mass can help. I can certainly see having difficulty holding a smartphone steady if one's hands have some tremor or if one has had too much coffee. Some extra mass adds some inertia and helps. Obviously too heavy is also not optimal, because muscles get tired.


Exactly. I don't want too heavy, but a grip that actually fits my hand with a reasonable amount of heft does wonders for stability. I can't tell you how many times I've pulled my phone out to take a photo and afterwards when looking at the taken photo on a larger display it has blur from camera shake, despite my best efforts to make a steady shot. Going to the trouble of actually carrying an RP with the RF 50/1.8 results in far better photos. My M5 is borderline too small, but much better than a camera phone.


----------



## Phenix205 (May 6, 2022)

lote82 said:


> "We have received reports from *two different countries ...*"


Good catch. Russia is one of the two for sure with so many businesses having pulled out.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 6, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Making a RF40mm pancake makes a lot of sense to me. It would be an excellent street combination and Canon does need to release more affordable RF lenses.
> Adapting the EF40mm doubles the weight, size and cost (assuming you weld the adapter just for this lens).


I don't think they should just make an adapted version, but rather, take the existing 50 and 16mm housing for RF and shave it down. They could pretty easily lose a half an inch off the length of the 50 with just a skinny control ring on the front and a slight barrel length shave. Both the RF 50 and 16 (I have both) are 1.75 inches long. The EF 40 (which I also have) is 1.125 inches long. I'd be totally happy if they got a RF 40 down to 1.25-1.5 inches long. Make it f/2 while they're at it. They can make the 50 f/1.8, no reason the 40 couldn't be f/2 in a slightly shorter package.


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 6, 2022)

Craig, fix this BS headline.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> All RF is, is EF plus some additional pins. EF-M is literally EF but a different physical mount. They could just keep everything the same and add the RF pins for newer lenses that have a control ring while keeping the same physical EF-M mount.


Really? Then why does an EF mount have 8 pins while an EF-M mount has 9 pins?

Maybe you only had one side of the headpiece of the staff, so the old mystic couldn’t tell you to take back one pin to honor the Buddhist goddess who’s mount this is.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 6, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> I don't think they should just make an adapted version, but rather, take the existing 50 and 16mm housing for RF and shave it down. They could pretty easily lose a half an inch off the length of the 50 with just a skinny control ring on the front and a slight barrel length shave. Both the RF 50 and 16 (I have both) are 1.75 inches long. The EF 40 (which I also have) is 1.125 inches long. I'd be totally happy if they got a RF 40 down to 1.25-1.5 inches long. Make it f/2 while they're at it. They can make the 50 f/1.8, no reason the 40 couldn't be f/2 in a slightly shorter package.


I agree. My point was to ask for a newly designed RF40mm pancake as the current adapted EF solution isn't that small/light/cheap which is what a pancake should be.


----------



## John Wilde (May 6, 2022)

Canon is still having parts supply problems;

"we prioritized the supply of high-end models such as the EOS R5 and EOS R6"
- Canon, April 26, 2022


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 6, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Really? Then why does an EF mount have 8 pins while an EF-M mount has 9 pins?
> 
> Maybe you only had one side of the headpiece of the staff, so the old mystic couldn’t tell you to take back one pin to honor the Buddhist goddess who’s mount this is.


OMG that slayed me, rotfl


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 6, 2022)

If we can somehow segue this cra cra thread into the image of a pancake lens with syrup, it would be palatable.


----------



## makei (May 6, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> I don't like this news.
> Because I cannot imagine if and what consequences this means to the EOS M system.
> I am no M owner. But if I was to get one body It would have been the M6 II. Because I like the idea of the optional EVF.
> 
> Edit: In Germany almost every shop has it on stock.


I had M6 MK2, and I don't like the optional EVF. I bought it becaue I find a really good 2nd price. the price is so low that it is basically free upgrade for me. But other than the EVF, it is a very good camera. Very quick and very good ergonomics. I like this even more than my Sony A7RIV


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 6, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Really? Then why does an EF mount have 8 pins while an EF-M mount has 9 pins?
> 
> Maybe you only had one side of the headpiece of the staff, so the old mystic couldn’t tell you to take back one pin to honor the Buddhist goddess who’s mount this is.


The 9th pin is reserved for future use. The other pins map to EF pins. If you have an EF to EF-M adapter, it's not difficult to see the mapping from EF to EF-M pins. It's literally a straight through.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 6, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I agree. My point was to ask for a newly designed RF40mm pancake as the current adapted EF solution isn't that small/light/cheap which is what a pancake should be.


Ah... No. With the RF to EF adapter it's a little longer than the RF 50 STM.


----------



## Bahrd (May 6, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> The M series uses PowerShot menus/software after all.


I think that - if any - this will be the actual nail in the coffin of M.


----------



## Skux (May 6, 2022)

This is the right move, and I'm saying this as an M6 Mark II owner.

Trying to support RF, EF, EF-S and EF-M makes no sense from a business or marketing standpoint. The entry and mid-level camera market is rapidly evaporating as phones get better at video and editing. Coupled with supply shortages it makes sense for Canon to focus on the products with the highest return per unit.

For me the R7 just needs to be a 32mp sensor with bird eye AF and R6 ergonomics and I can finally fully transition to RF for all my digital workflow.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 6, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> Ah... No. With the RF to EF adapter it's a little longer than the RF 50 STM.


Correct. But comparing the EF50mm and the EF40mm, the EF40mm is about half the length. My thought is that a RF40mm pancake should be about half the length of the RF50mm. That would be great!


----------



## AlanF (May 6, 2022)

Skux said:


> This is the right move, and I'm saying this as an M6 Mark II owner.
> 
> Trying to support RF, EF, EF-S and EF-M makes no sense from a business or marketing standpoint. The entry and mid-level camera market is rapidly evaporating as phones get better at video and editing. Coupled with supply shortages it makes sense for Canon to focus on the products with the highest return per unit.
> 
> For me the R7 just needs to be a 32mp sensor with bird eye AF and R6 ergonomics and I can finally fully transition to RF for all my digital workflow.


The number of units is crucial. The highest return per unit is probably the RF 1200 but the number of units will be minimal.


----------



## mustafa (May 6, 2022)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


M5 mkII please.


----------



## Chig (May 6, 2022)

Kit Chan said:


> If they don't follow up with an M7 announcement that'll solidify my decision to change to Fuji. I don't want a bulky FF mount on an APS-C camera.


Oh yeah 54mm instead of 47mm , wow that's 3.5mm bigger radially so the camera will potentially be slightly larger . Oh dear !


----------



## RexxReviews (May 6, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> Sounds like a disappointed user expecting more from a consumer system to become a pro system.
> 
> 
> Maybe in your gear setup, maybe in your country.
> ...


I knew exactly what it was.... I own currently 2 R3 bodies, 2 R5 bodies and a double set of all of the currently Canon RF lenses that matter. Thats is my personal stash. The company that I own and run has far more than that. The M-format is a waste.


----------



## mustafa (May 6, 2022)

RexxReviews said:


> I knew exactly what it was.... I own currently 2 R3 bodies, 2 R5 bodies and a double set of all of the currently Canon RF lenses that matter. Thats is my personal stash. The company that I own and run has far more than that. The M-format is a waste.


To you, maybe. For others, it's a useful small line-up that can supplement the RF line. I have both, for different purposes.


----------



## lustyd (May 6, 2022)

Skux said:


> The entry and mid-level camera market is rapidly evaporating as phones get better at video and editing.


The data suggests otherwise. YouTube and Instagram have created a huge new market for small mirrorless cameras such as M series, as has streaming on platforms like Twitch. Sony created their Vlogger range for this very reason. Just because photography is declining doesn't mean the market is disapearing. People are not generally buying a $4k body for vlogging or streaming, they're buying small mirrorless systems.


----------



## dilbert (May 6, 2022)

unfocused said:


> This should be good for another dozen pages of forum battles.



Don't forget the ad placements and revenue for CR.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> The 9th pin is reserved for future use. The other pins map to EF pins. If you have an EF to EF-M adapter, it's not difficult to see the mapping from EF to EF-M pins. It's literally a straight through.


Your staff is too short. You’re digging in the wrong place.

Why is it that when people don’t understand something, they make up some bullshit to support their incorrect statements, and think people will believe it? It’s puerile, like when your kid tries to convince you they brushed their teeth, but their breath smells like dinner and they didn’t even bother wetting their toothbrush to make the lie plausible.

Did you really just count the 8 pins on the EF lens-facing side of the adapter and the 9 contacts on the EF-M camera-facing side and come to that simplistic and totally incorrect conclusion? ‘Reserved for future use’ is really the best you could come up with? Well, people make themselves look like idiots every day, so you’ve got lots of company.

With a modicum of initiative, you could have at least counted lens contacts. EF-M lenses have 9 to match the 9 mount pins, whereas EF lenses have only 7 contacts for the 8 mount pins. One of the EF lens contacts is double-width and bridges two mount pins together, that’s the analog ground. EF-M uses a single pin for ground, so functionally there are two additional pins in the EF-M mount. The mount adapter wires two of the pins on the EF side to a single contact on the EF-M side. 

Of the two new pins in the EF-M mount, one is an electronic replacement for a physical microswitch in the EF mount to confirm full mounting of a lens. The other is used to signal that an EF/EF-S lens is mounted in the adapter when it’s used.

The remaining pins have the same functionality for both mounts, although the order of the pins is different between them. Also, EF-M lenses operate at a lower voltage and higher clock speed than EF lenses. So no, it's not even close to 'literally straight through'. 

Details on the EF-M mount shared above are described in its patent:





US9638987B2 - Camera and camera accessory - Google Patents


The camera side mount is brought, by relative rotation with the accessory side mount, from a first state where each accessory side bayonet claw is inserted between the camera side bayonet claws into a second state where the camera side and accessory side bayonet claws engage with each other. The...



patents.google.com





The right thing for you to do here would be to admit that you were wrong. Go ahead...surprise me.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

Chig said:


> Oh yeah 54mm instead of 47mm , wow that's 3.5mm bigger radially so the camera will potentially be slightly larger . Oh dear !


Compare the EF-M 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 STM to the EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 STM. Same top line specs, same number of elements, same weight. The EF-S lens, which needs to accommodate the throat diameter of a FF mount, is a 'slight' *58%* larger by volume.


----------



## LSXPhotog (May 6, 2022)

Kit Chan said:


> If they don't follow up with an M7 announcement that'll solidify my decision to change to Fuji. I don't want a bulky FF mount on an APS-C camera.


As someone that made the switch to Fujifilm for travel, I would love to share my experiences with you - if you had any questions. Just get ready for a comically large step backwards in all things autofocus.


----------



## tron (May 6, 2022)

Maximilian said:


> I don't like this news.
> Because I cannot imagine if and what consequences this means to the EOS M system.
> *I am no M owner. But if I was to get one body It would have been the M6 II*. Because I like the idea of the optional EVF.
> 
> Edit: In Germany almost every shop has it on stock.


Same here! It's nice to have options.


----------



## hachu21 (May 6, 2022)

LSXPhotog said:


> As someone that made the switch to Fujifilm for travel, I would love to share my experiences with you - if you had any questions. Just get ready for a comically large step backwards in all things autofocus.


Interesting. Wich bodies precisely?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

RexxReviews said:


> The M-format is a waste.


If you're unable to use it to take good pictures, then yes, it's a waste for you. Not everyone is like you.


----------



## takesome1 (May 6, 2022)

Wow, Canon has discontinued the M6 Mark II. The M line must be on the way out, I read it on the internet.

It possibly would make sense in some way that a APS-C R body will be released and the M canceled.
The Canon line does not have the migration path to upper end bodies with the R system that it had with EF-s to EF line.
The M line answered the call for a mirror-less body to compete when it had none. But that is not a niche for the body anymore.
If the M line does get phased out it will be more about potential profit and sales rather than current sales.


----------



## JustUs7 (May 6, 2022)

lote82 said:


> For me personally (while traveling with my family) it's a tough decision finding the right balance between being a good father and a selfish photographing ass.



My kids usually let me know which one I’m being.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (May 6, 2022)

This is great news for Fuji! Rumors of the M system demise may be premature, but the uncertainty certainly creates an opportunity for Fuji to emphasize a robust APS sensor, a mature and excellent lens line and compact ergonomically excellent body choices. Perhaps even M4/3 may start a re-emergence as an alternative to bulky full frame options.


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 6, 2022)

dickgrafixstop said:


> This is great news for Fuji! Rumors of the M system demise may be premature, but the uncertainty certainly creates an opportunity for Fuji to emphasize a robust APS sensor, a mature and excellent lens line and compact ergonomically excellent body choices. Perhaps even M4/3 may start a re-emergence as an alternative to bulky full frame options.


Until they 'possibly' realize the colors, AF and menus pale in comparison to what they had with Canon. YMMV.


----------



## Dragon (May 6, 2022)

takesome1 said:


> Wow, Canon has discontinued the M6 Mark II. The M line must be on the way out, I read it on the internet.
> 
> It possibly would make sense in some way that a APS-C R body will be released and the M canceled.
> The Canon line does not have the migration path to upper end bodies with the R system that it had with EF-s to EF line.
> ...


I think you have that backwards. EF-s lenses don't fit on an EF body, so the only migration path was for an EF-s body owner to buy EF lenses. If he, she, it bought an EF body, his EF-s lenses didn't come along for the ride.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 6, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Correct. But comparing the EF50mm and the EF40mm, the EF40mm is about half the length. My thought is that a RF40mm pancake should be about half the length of the RF50mm. That would be great!


That would be nice, though half the length would make it thinner than the current EF 40. I'd be happy with roughly the same length as the EF 40.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

Dragon said:


> I think you have that backwards. EF-s lenses don't fit on and EF body, so the only migration path was for an EF-s body owner to buy EF lenses. If he, she, it bought an EF body, his EF-s lenses didn't come along for the ride.


And as I've pointed out several times, Canon had mountains of data from product registrations on who bought what bodies and lenses and when, so they knew quite well how often people followed that migration path when they intentionally chose to design out the ability to mount RF lenses on M bodies.


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (May 6, 2022)

Chig said:


> Oh yeah 54mm instead of 47mm , wow that's 3.5mm bigger radially so the camera will potentially be slightly larger . Oh dear !


For the vertical size of the camera it's at least 7mm more needed to place the mount, which is not negligible (if you want to play with numbers) and that is not even considering the RF mount is thicker.
Good luck with trying to put safely a RF mount on a M200 or even a bigger M6 Mark II. (see figures)
Whatsoever, Nikon did the move with Z mount. The result is they have very small FF Z6 and Z7 but, to my sense, Z50 and ZFc are already significantly bigger than EOS M50.
The goal of M system is (was ?) to be as small as possible. 
Using RF mount would probably dismiss this purpose. Even if it's possible to produce a smaller camera than RP, I mean it couldn't be the same cameras as M6 or M200, whatever is the design. And even with the M50 design, that leaves more room thanks to the addition of the VF, it would probably be quite tricky, I think.
Also, the shapes and sizes of RF-S lenses would have to be different too, of course. 
Let's hope Canon can do an equivalent to the EF-M 11-22mm, for instance, which is one of the best wide angle zoom they produced, especially considering the performances/size+price ratio. 
But of course, there are also financial motivations, and M system can look less future proof than R in that regard at this right moment.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 6, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Your staff is too short. You’re digging in the wrong place.
> 
> Why is it that when people don’t understand something, they make up some bullshit to support their incorrect statements, and think people will believe it? It’s puerile, like when your kid tries to convince you they brushed their teeth, but their breath smells like dinner and they didn’t even bother wetting their toothbrush to make the lie plausible.
> 
> ...


What a surprise, some guy on the internet has taken to calling others idiots when he doesn't agree with them. Shocker.

If you want to get super technical and start splitting hairs, fine. At that level, I'm wrong, however the fact remains that EF glass mounted on an M body just works and doesn't require (as far as I can tell) an intermediary translator board in the adapter to translate between the two mounts. For me, that's effectively pass-through. Not passthrough would be something like MFT to EF.

It's pretty clear you have an overwhelming desire to be right and come out on top at the expense of disparaging others, and I have other things to do, so I'll step off and let you declare your victory over me. If you're actually like that in real life, I'd spend as little time as possible around you. This could have evolved into a discussion about what the actual differences were, but alas... people...


----------



## Sibir Lupus (May 6, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> The M series uses Powershot menus/software afterall.


Not all of them did. The M and M2 used EOS menus and software.


----------



## lote82 (May 6, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> It's pretty clear you have an overwhelming desire to be right and come out on top at the expense of disparaging others, and I have other things to do, so I'll step off and let you declare your victory over me. If you're actually like that in real life, I'd spend as little time as possible around you. This could have evolved into a discussion about what the actual differences were, but alas... people...


Legends say he's not a real person but a ghost of a real Norwegian-Troll roaming through forums and sucking energy from its members... But who knows!


----------



## Maximilian (May 6, 2022)

RexxReviews said:


> ... The M-format is a waste.


Maybe for you...
Enjoy your other gear and stop whining over a tool that doesn't fit your needs but others.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> What a surprise, some guy on the internet has taken to calling others idiots when he doesn't agree with them. Shocker.
> 
> If you want to get super technical and start splitting hairs, fine. At that level, I'm wrong, however the fact remains that EF glass mounted on an M body just works and doesn't require (as far as I can tell) an intermediary translator board in the adapter to translate between the two mounts. For me, that's effectively pass-through. Not passthrough would be something like MFT to EF.
> 
> It's pretty clear you have an overwhelming desire to be right and come out on top at the expense of disparaging others, and I have other things to do, so I'll step off and let you declare your victory over me. If you're actually like that in real life, I'd spend as little time as possible around you. This could have evolved into a discussion about what the actual differences were, but alas... people...


I don't call people idiots because I disagree with them. I call people idiots when they post incorrect information, then try to back those false statements up with more incorrect information.

I knew that admitting you were wrong was too much to expect. You can just reserve that for future use, like the 9th pin in your EF-M mount. 

Alas, people...


----------



## takesome1 (May 6, 2022)

Dragon said:


> I think you have that backwards. EF-s lenses don't fit on and EF body, so the only migration path was for an EF-s body owner to buy EF lenses. If he, she, it bought an EF body, his EF-s lenses didn't come along for the ride.



The 50D was the bridge camera from crop to full frame. (Canon's marketing at the time). Later the 7D was released with the same idea. You have a path up for IQ.

So you buy a crop body it comes with a kit lens. The EF-s lens doesn't need to leave your kit just because you bought a FF body. It still fits on the crop body it came with. My 5D II and 50D went on many rides together over the course of several years.


----------



## Dragon (May 6, 2022)

takesome1 said:


> The 50D was the bridge camera from crop to full frame. (Canon's marketing at the time). Later the 7D was released with the same idea. You have a path up for IQ.
> 
> So you buy a crop body it comes with a kit lens. The EF-s lens doesn't need to leave your kit just because you bought a FF body. It still fits on the crop body it came with. My 5D II and 50D went on many rides together over the course of several years.


And my R5 and my m6 II go on many rides together. I fail to see much difference.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

takesome1 said:


> So you buy a crop body it comes with a kit lens. The EF-s lens doesn't need to leave your kit just because you bought a FF body. It still fits on the crop body it came with. My 5D II and 50D went on many rides together over the course of several years.


I skipped the kit lens with my T1i/500D, and bought the EF-S 17-55/2.8 instead. After switching to a 7D, I got the 5DII with 24-105/4L and the IQ was so much better that I stopped using the 7D with anything other than the 100-400L. Once the 1D X arrived, I sold the 5DII but hung onto the 7D, expecting to use it for 'reach' but the keeper rate and IQ were better with the 1D X so I sold the 7D as well.


----------



## John Wilde (May 6, 2022)

takesome1 said:


> Wow, Canon has discontinued the M6 Mark II. The M line must be on the way out, I read it on the internet.


In the USA, the M6 II is still carried by Best Buy, Amazon, B&H, and Adorama. They must not read the internet.


----------



## unfocused (May 6, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> ...they knew quite well how often people followed that migration path when they intentionally chose to design out the ability to mount RF lenses on M bodies.


I doubt it was that simple. When Canon announced the RF mount they made it pretty clear that they only reluctantly introduced the new mount because they simply could not achieve the kinds of innovations they intend with new mirrorless lenses using the EF mount. If they could not make the EF mount work, then I doubt they "intentionally chose to design out" compatibility with M bodies. More likely, there was no reasonable way to make it work. That's also consistent with the theory that the M System was something of a mirrorless test bed for Canon.


----------



## scyrene (May 6, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> What a surprise, some guy on the internet has taken to calling others idiots when he doesn't agree with them. Shocker.
> 
> If you want to get super technical and start splitting hairs, fine. At that level, I'm wrong, however the fact remains that EF glass mounted on an M body just works and doesn't require (as far as I can tell) an intermediary translator board in the adapter to translate between the two mounts. For me, that's effectively pass-through. Not passthrough would be something like MFT to EF.
> 
> It's pretty clear you have an overwhelming desire to be right and come out on top at the expense of disparaging others, and I have other things to do, so I'll step off and let you declare your victory over me. If you're actually like that in real life, I'd spend as little time as possible around you. This could have evolved into a discussion about what the actual differences were, but alas... people...


I mean... you were wrong. That's about the most begrudging way to admit it, but at least you did. No need to lash out. Being factually incorrect isn't "disagreeing". Neuro can be strident and brusque but he's tirelessly countered nonsense* on this site longer than I've been here.

*not calling your statements nonsense, I haven't paid close enough attention to what you've been saying tbh


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

unfocused said:


> I doubt it was that simple. When Canon announced the RF mount they made it pretty clear that they only reluctantly introduced the new mount because they simply could not achieve the kinds of innovations they intend with new mirrorless lenses using the EF mount. If they could not make the EF mount work, then I doubt they "intentionally chose to design out" compatibility with M bodies. More likely, there was no reasonable way to make it work. That's also consistent with the theory that the M System was something of a mirrorless test bed for Canon.


It would have been relatively simple for them to make the RF flange distance sightly longer to accommodate an RF-M adapter. 

But you may be correct that even a few millimeters would have meant more design compromises than they were willing to make. 

Still, optically it would certainly have been possible for them to make an RF mount compatible with M cameras, If that was the most important consideration involved in the decision. The fact remains that they chose not to do so.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> In the USA, the M6 II is still carried by Best Buy, Amazon, B&H, and Adorama. They must not read the internet.


I’m sure they’ll get the official word soon enough. When they do, no doubt they will put it on deeply discounted clearance. I expect that very soon I will be able to buy one for $200, from my local Best Buy with curbside pick up.

They can bring it out to the flying pig parked in space #3.


----------



## unfocused (May 6, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> ...Still, optically it would certainly have been possible for them to make an RF mount compatible with M cameras, If that was the most important consideration involved in the decision. The fact remains that they chose not to do so.


Yes. And while I tend to agree with you that the main reason was that Canon sees the M and R as two separate markets, it is also not unreasonable for some people to see it as evidence that Canon was less than committed to the M line when they were developing the R system.


----------



## AlanF (May 6, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> I’m sure they’ll get the official word soon enough. When they do, no doubt they will put it on deeply discounted clearance. I expect that very soon I will be able to buy one for $200, from my local Best Buy with curbside pick up.
> 
> They can bring it out to the flying pig parked in space #3.


Flying pig - most apt. Spending the night in Heathrow T5 in preparation for my first flight since November 2019. I got the first M discounted heavily. Never regretted it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2022)

unfocused said:


> Yes. And while I tend to agree with you that the main reason was that Canon sees the M and R as two separate markets, it is also not unreasonable for some people to see it as evidence that Canon was less than committed to the M line when they were developing the R system.


Your logic escapes me, or at least the logic you are ascribing to those people. APS-C cameras comprise 85-90% of the ILC market, and we’re talking about a putative _up_grade path, i.e., APS-C owners buying a FF camera.

While I’m sure there are some people who buy an APS-C camera with a plan to subsequently buy a FF camera, I suspect far more people who upgrade initially picked APS-C because of the lower cost and sometime later realized they wanted more/better/etc., leading to a FF purchase. To the extent that’s true, the lack an M to R upgrade path, given the far larger APS-C market, would show less of a commitment by Canon to the R line.

Having said that, during the development of the R series, DSLRs comprised a strong majority of the ILC market and Canon ensured lens compatibility there.


----------



## flaviojzk (May 6, 2022)

LSXPhotog said:


> As someone that made the switch to Fujifilm for travel, I would love to share my experiences with you - if you had any questions. Just get ready for a comically large step backwards in all things autofocus.


And the budget conscious shifting to Fuiifilm hopefully won’t need a wide-angle zoom like the 11-22. Theirs is painfully expensive…a shame if the M mount goes away, it offers so much for our money.


----------



## MythPlayer (May 7, 2022)

Czardoom said:


> Or maybe it's just a rumor. And that's all it will be until Canon says it is discontinued.
> 
> Rumor sites jut love to discontinue items. Some of them - miraculously - turn out to not be discontinued after all.


But


neuroanatomist said:


> The M6II is still being sold on the Canon Japan store.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nah，In store page all M6II model marked [Sell ended]，cannot add to cart.
btw，canon japan website camera lineup page marked M6II [few stock left] from february


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2022)

John Wilde said:


> Deep discounts happen when there is a large excess inventory. If Canon intended to discontinue the M6 II, it would have quit manufacturing it many months ago. When there are comparatively few units left, a company can dribble them out at a higher price.


Please read the part about the flying pig.


----------



## bf (May 7, 2022)

Keep calm and carry on the M line! Or, Fuji X, Nikon Zf, Sony 6K are out there!


----------



## stevelee (May 7, 2022)

I have looked at some of the M series, mainly the M50 three years ago. I had a really good first impression, but decided by that fall to go with the pocketable G5X II for travel instead. I had had good luck with the G7X II for travel. I have thought about getting an M-series camera, but never came up with an idea of what I would use it for. My FF DSLR is no bother when I am not far from home or going by car. Another camera I would like to have is the Fuji “medium format.” But there again I decided I wouldn’t suddenly become an avid landscape photographer just because I had spent $10K on a camera and a couple lenses. I never have occasion to use my Rebel any more, so I obviously don’t really need the “reach” from a crop sensor. I don’t chase flying birds or shoot wildlife. (Though I can enjoy others’ shots of them.) My 100–400mm zoom is more than adequate for my telephoto needs.

I will mention my one non-kit EF-S lens, the 10–22mm. I shot interiors for a Realtor with it and my T3i. Results were great, and it was the last time I made any money from photography.


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 7, 2022)

stevelee said:


> I have looked at some of the M series, mainly the M50 three years ago. I had a really good first impression, but decided by that fall to go with the pocketable G5X II for travel instead. I had had good luck with the G7X II for travel. I have thought about getting an M-series camera, but never came up with an idea of what I would use it for. My FF DSLR is no bother when I am not far from home or going by car. Another camera I would like to have is the Fuji “medium format.” But there again I decided I wouldn’t suddenly become an avid landscape photographer just because I had spent $10K on a camera and a couple lenses. I never have occasion to use my Rebel any more, so I obviously don’t really need the “reach” from a crop sensor. I don’t chase flying birds or shoot wildlife. (Though I can enjoy others’ shots of them.) My 100–400mm zoom is more than adequate for my telephoto needs.
> 
> I will mention my one non-kit EF-S lens, the 10–22mm. I shot interiors for a Realtor with it and my T3i. Results were great, and it was the last time I made any money from photography.


The 10-22 was the little brother in terms of FL and value to the EF 16-35 f/4L. Loved that lens when I shot with a 60D/7D.


----------



## stevelee (May 7, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> The 10-22 was the little brother in terms of FL and value to the EF 16-35 f/4L. Loved that lens when I shot with a 60D/7D.


Since I got the 6D2, I now use the EF 16–35 f/4L, and I think it is great. So I really have everything covered for my purposes in cameras and lenses, with the possible exception of the 24mm TS-E. I rented it and had fun, but concluded that it would not get enough use for me to own. i can always rent one for a week or so if some use comes along. Even with a bit too much money in two checking accounts (from not going much of anywhere for two years), I am not experiencing much of a case of GAS in the photo realm. My Mac Studio (significantly upgraded but not Ultra) will be delivered in June. So that will be my new toy for a while.


----------



## LSXPhotog (May 7, 2022)

hachu21 said:


> Interesting. Wich bodies precisely?


I had an X-E4 and about 8 months later also added an X-T4...then I became so frustrated with the X-E4's screen issue I sold it and got the X-T30II when it was released this January. Both of those cameras, the X-T4 and X-T30II represent the best Fujifilm has to offer in terms of the camera's autofocusing. I've found both cameras to be pretty unreliable with tracking as the cameras often will be locked on a subject and then go check on something else for a while, before returning or losing the subject entirely. Face Detection is so inconsistent and completely uncontrollable (other than selecting another face it "finds" in the frame) that you should leave that feature off 100% of the time...this is an area the M6II was a monster with. It's so bad that I honestly believe they shouldn't even list it as something the camera can even do.

Unfortunately, it's not JUST with AF-C tracking.....with shooting real estate, I've shot with the 5D Mark IV, M6II, R6, R5, and R3 using Dual Pixel for probably 5+ years. I have maybe missed focus less than 10 times after AF confirmation in some normal/poorly lit rooms. I used the X-T4 and XF10-24 for 3 listings so far and it has missed multiple times in each home I shot. So it's a very big surprise to me, given my experience autofocusing in the typical poor light I come across.

So you may ask "then why do you still use these cameras if they focus as poorly as I say?" Because I've never had more fun using any digital camera than I have using any Fuji camera and lens. It's absolutely fun to take photos and allows me to separate my work gear and fun gear. I don't regret finding the "goldilocks" camera for me from Fuji.


----------



## OneSnark (May 7, 2022)

Late to the thread.

This does NOT surprise me. 

Coming from an 80D APC-C with a fair number of "red ring" lenses snob viewpoint; 

I was seriously considering buying into the "M" system; as a travel rig. . . but while one or two *lenses* were interesting; most were F6.3-F7.1 crud. I was seeing a few bodies released each year. . .but nothing worthwhile in terms of lenses. This shied me away from the entire product line. I now use a G5x-II for travel. Or an iPhone. Works well enough.

As for the RF line. . . . . . well. . . . mirrorless is hardly earthshattering in my mind.. . .but still . . .I am not adverse to investing a few $K in a fancy new body with the newest wizbang features. Especially if it's an upgrade to FF. HOWEVER. . . the lenses. . . .I have to use a converter to use all my existing lenses? And all the native RF lenses are likely $750-$1000 higher in cost to the perfectly fine EF equivalents.? Ummm. . . .no. . . . . A proper conversion is not $3K for a body; but $10K for a body and 2 or three choice zoom lenses? ummmm. . . no.. . .

Just NO.

- - - - -

And back to the point: What makes me think I would want a body with a RF "APS-C" format? What lenses am I attaching to that body? More overpriced F6.3 - F 7.1 crud?

- - - 

If I am going to start from scratch. . . why would I chose Canon over Sony?


----------



## Bob Howland (May 7, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> Late to the thread.
> 
> This does NOT surprise me.
> 
> ...


I use a G7X for travel. The M system has been a big disappointment.


----------



## LogicExtremist (May 7, 2022)

Perspective can be an incredible thing, especially in forum discussions!

Regarding the value of the Canon EF-M platform, it depends on what a person's needs are. It's an affordable, easy-to-use entry-mid level system with very portable camera bodies, a quality APSC sensor and lightweight lenses. For the majority of everyday Canon camera buyers that only purchase a single camera with one or two kit lenses and are done, these are great value for money kits, which will do just about everything that the majority of the market needs. It's a complete and mature platform with a small handful of lenses, in case buyers needs might extend beyond the basic kit lenses. For anyone wanting to progress from a smartphone to mirrorless camera, this platform is ideal. The M50 cameras have been really popular as easy to use video cam,eras for many YouTubers and vloggers, and also as affordable mirrorless APSC stills camera. More advanced users can adapt EF and EF-S lenses for more versatility. Considering the target market, price and the compromises necessary for ultra-portability, this platform has its limitations. It's great for what it is, as consumers are voting with their wallets to confirm this! If we keep in mind that everyone else does not necessarily have the same needs as members of this forum, things make more sense. It's also a fallacy that the latest and greatest, most expensive photo gear is necessary to be able to take great photos. For a lot of people, Canon's M-system is plenty, for some , it's a bad fit for their needs. So who is right? It's an invalid apples to oranges comparison to argue the worth of the platform from the point of very differing needs perspectives.

Yes, the Canon EOS M6 Mark II is being discontinued, and it's not in Russia!

For anyone who read the story about the Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense video release where a Ukrainian soldier disassembles a Russian Orlan-10 unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) military surveillance drone, the soldier found that the primary image capture camera was a Canon EOS Rebel T6i (AKA 750D), a DSLR camera launched in 2015. Incidentally, the mounting panel had a Canon/Sony switch!

Whether it's related to this incident or not, Canon Europe (Canon EMEA), which is the strategic headquarters for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa and is based in London and Amstelveen, announced that it* suspends all its product deliveries into Russia*. Their official statement was:

_“The violence and destruction being caused by the military attacks on Ukraine is shocking to all of us. We share our heartfelt concerns for our colleagues and the Ukrainian people whose lives have been deeply affected. As part of the world-wide relief efforts supporting Ukraine, we are donating to international aid and humanitarian organizations in Ukraine, Poland, Romania, Moldova, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Slovakia. As of earlier this week, Canon EMEA suspended all product deliveries into Russia. We continue monitoring the fast-evolving situation and developments. We stand united in desire for peace”_

The ban on sales to Russia isn't only on Rebel DSLRs used in military drones, nor M6 MKII mirorless camera, it is all products, meaning everything! This is different to a discontinued product.

So which countries has the Canon EOS M6 Mark II is being discontinued in? Searching though Canon US, CAN, UK, AU, and their retailers we find:
US - available
CAN - available
UK - available
*AU - discontinued*

It looks like Canon Australia has definitely discontinued the M6 Mark II. If anyone can find the second country, that would be great!


----------



## stevelee (May 7, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> I was seriously considering buying into the "M" system; as a travel rig. . . but while one or two *lenses* were interesting; most were F6.3-F7.1 crud. I was seeing a few bodies released each year. . .but nothing worthwhile in terms of lenses. This shied me away from the entire product line. I now use a G5x-II for travel. Or an iPhone. Works well enough.


The G5X II as a travel camera has the advantage of an f/1.8-2.8 lens. I find myself in dark, cramped spaces, such as chapels in Italy. So when I need the speed the most, I am shooting at the wide end where the lens is fastest. On bigger cameras out in daylight, I'm shooting about f/8 anyway, so f/7.1 is not crud. But with the small lens and sensor, diffraction becomes an issue very early. Auto exposure chooses wide apertures and low ISOs. I don't know how or when the built-in ND filter kicks in. Maybe that is just for video. So I agree with your travel camera choice. I don't seem on trips ever to regret the 120mm equivalent telephoto limitation. But with cramped interiors and spacious scenic vistas, I could use something wider than the 24mm equivalent. So I resort to taking shots to be stitched once I get home.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2022)

stevelee said:


> But with cramped interiors and spacious scenic vistas, I could use something wider than the 24mm equivalent.


For urban travel, I would not want to be limited to 24mm on the wide end. Many times, even the wide end of the M11-22 is too narrow:



That was an overnight trip where I took just the M kit. On longer trips, I generally have a FF camera and the 11-24/4L, which is useful outdoors and in:


----------



## Bob Howland (May 7, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> For urban travel, I would not want to be limited to 24mm on the wide end. Many times, even the wide end of the M11-22 is too narrow:
> View attachment 203431
> 
> 
> ...


Were any of those taken using a tripod?


----------



## OneSnark (May 7, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> I use a G7X for travel. The M system has been a big disappointment.



I upgraded a G7x-II to the G5x-II. Although the G5x is less "pocketable"; the EVF is handy and I find the autofocus better. Very nice results.



stevelee said:


> The G5X II as a travel camera has the advantage of an f/1.8-2.8 lens. I find myself in dark, cramped spaces, such as chapels in Italy. So when I need the speed the most, I am shooting at the wide end where the lens is fastest. On bigger cameras out in daylight, I'm shooting about f/8 anyway, so f/7.1 is not crud. But with the small lens and sensor, diffraction becomes an issue very early. Auto exposure chooses wide apertures and low ISOs. I don't know how or when the built-in ND filter kicks in. Maybe that is just for video. So I agree with your travel camera choice. I don't seem on trips ever to regret the 120mm equivalent telephoto limitation. But with cramped interiors and spacious scenic vistas, I could use something wider than the 24mm equivalent. So I resort to taking shots to be stitched once I get home.




THIS.

Yeah, I like the fast lens. . . . but I am not a fan of the distortion at the wide end. Which is why I wished that the "M" line had a *high quality* F4 zoom alternative. (wasn't being greedy by asking for F2.8 or F2 zooms). For "out in daylight, I'm shooting F8". I hear you on that - - but honestly the P&S (or even a phone) does fine under those conditions. It's for the dark churches that you want the larger sensor (APS-C or FF) and fast glass.

And let's be clear: I *might* have been sold if a F6.3 lens had great image quality; low distortion and good resolution curves. However, the slow M kit lenses did not fit that description. So - - - pass. 

Side note: I heard about the good rep for the few M primes. That's all well and good (and I was tempted); but *for a travel rig*; one gotta have zooms (after all. . the intent is to NOT have a big bag of lenses with you . . . .)


----------



## hachu21 (May 7, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> Yeah, I like the fast lens. . . . but I am not a fan of the distortion at the wide end. Which is why I wished that the "M" line had a *high quality* F4 zoom alternative. (wasn't being greedy by asking for F2.8 or F2 zooms). For "out in daylight, I'm shooting F8". I hear you on that - - but honestly the P&S (or even a phone) does fine under those conditions. It's for the dark churches that you want the larger sensor (APS-C or FF) and fast glass.
> 
> And let's be clear: I *might* have been sold if a F6.3 lens had great image quality; low distortion and good resolution curves. However, the slow M kit lenses did not fit that description. So - - - pass.
> 
> Side note: I heard about the good rep for the few M primes. That's all well and good (and I was tempted); but *for a travel rig*; one gotta have zooms (after all. . the intent is to NOT have a big bag of lenses with you . . . .)


The 11-22mm f/4-5.6 is one of the M line strengh. To my knowledge, there is no alternative in any brand with such size/price/quality ratio.


----------



## Bob Howland (May 7, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> I upgraded a G7x-II to the G5x-II. Although the G5x is less "pocketable"; the EVF is handy and I find the autofocus better. Very nice results.


I looked at the G5X but bought the G7x because of pocketability


OneSnark said:


> Side note: I heard about the good rep for the few M primes. That's all well and good (and I was tempted); but *for a travel rig*; one gotta have zooms (after all. . the intent is to NOT have a big bag of lenses with you . . . .)


I have two Sigma primes (16 & 30), the Canon 22 f/2 and the 18-150 but found myself always taking the G7X or a DSLR and L lens. The M5 turned out to be a rather poor substitute in both directions.


----------



## hachu21 (May 7, 2022)

stevelee said:


> The G5X II as a travel camera has the advantage of an f/1.8-2.8 lens. I find myself in dark, cramped spaces, such as chapels in Italy. So when I need the speed the most, I am shooting at the wide end where the lens is fastest. On bigger cameras out in daylight, I'm shooting about f/8 anyway, so f/7.1 is not crud. But with the small lens and sensor, diffraction becomes an issue very early. Auto exposure chooses wide apertures and low ISOs. I don't know how or when the built-in ND filter kicks in. Maybe that is just for video. So I agree with your travel camera choice. I don't seem on trips ever to regret the 120mm equivalent telephoto limitation. But with cramped interiors and spacious scenic vistas, I could use something wider than the 24mm equivalent. So I resort to taking shots to be stitched once I get home.


For low light shots, don't forget that f/1.8-2.8 on 1" sensor is equivalent to f/3.0-4.7 on an Canon APSC sensor. Still brighter but not far off the 15-45 f/3.5-6.3 kit lens. With the added possibility of brighter primes.
But I also get the convenience of a all-in-one package.


----------



## hachu21 (May 7, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> I looked at the G5X but bought the G7x because of pocketability
> 
> I have two Sigma primes (16 & 30), the Canon 22 f/2 and the 18-150 but found myself always taking the G7X or a DSLR and L lens. The M5 turned out to be a rather poor substitute in both directions.


Interesting viewpoint. best portability OR best quality. Makes sense.
I've always looked for versatility for my tools (mountain bike, skis, clothes, caméras...) So for me the M is the affordable-yet-delivering jack of all trades. When you want only one system, the M has a hard-to-beat value for money. Especially the few lenses.

Maybe, that's why it will be chopped-off. Camera manufacturers are ALL pushing toward higher margin portfolios after all.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2022)

Bob Howland said:


> Were any of those taken using a tripod?


The WWII memorial in DC was on a tripod (30 s exposure and cropped to pano view, not stitched), the interior of the Saint-Gatien Cathedral in Tours, France was handheld (1/40 s exposure).

The London Eye was on a GorillaPod SLR Zoom on the ground (3.2 s exposure). The GorillaPod is a great companion to an M body, it’s small and light but very useful and versatile…just like the M series. Here’s another shot of the Eye with the M11-22 (2.5 s), taken from one of the Golden Jubilee Bridges over the Thames with the GorillaPod wrapped around a railing:


----------



## hachu21 (May 7, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> So which countries has the Canon EOS M6 Mark II is being discontinued in? Searching though Canon US, CAN, UK, AU, and their retailers we find:
> US - available
> CAN - available
> UK - available
> ...


Canon France : available
Canon Germany : available
Canon Italy : available
Canon Spain : available
Canon Swiss : available


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2022)

hachu21 said:


> The 11-22mm f/4-5.6 is one of the M line strengh. To my knowledge, there is no alternative in any brand with such size/price/quality ratio.


Agreed. For me, no travel solution would work without something wider than 24mm (FF equivalent framing). I have used the PowerShot S95/S100 as walkaround pocket cameras for casual family outings, but the iPhone camera is now good enough to server that purpose.

In fact, if I really want to travel light on a trip I take just the M6, M11-22 and the GorillaPod. The camera+lens fits in the little LowePro DashPoint 30, and the kit is quite small (pictured on an 8.5x11” piece of paper):


----------



## koenkooi (May 7, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Agreed. For me, no travel solution would work without something wider than 24mm (FF equivalent framing). I have used the PowerShot S95/S100 as walkaround pocket cameras for casual family outings, but the iPhone camera is now good enough to server that purpose.
> 
> In fact, if I really want to travel light on a trip I take just the M6, M11-22 and the GorillaPod. The camera+lens fits in the little LowePro DashPoint 30, and the kit is quite small (pictured on an 8.5x11” piece of paper):
> View attachment 203435


For years I travelled with the M1+22mm in a dashpoint20, such a small package!


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 7, 2022)

koenkooi said:


> For years I travelled with the M1+22mm in a dashpoint20, such a small package!


I’ve done that, too, although the M6 is very slightly too large. The DashPoint 20 is a perfect fit for an M18-150 or M55-200.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (May 7, 2022)

kcimer said:


> I would like to see (buy) replacement for 22mm f/2 - say 1.4 with excelent resolution and image quality like the 32mm f/1.4, something like 10-25mm f/4 to replace 11-22mm, and a nice standard zoom 16-50mm f/2.8.


Those seem like larger lenses.
Canon never intended the M system like that


----------



## stevelee (May 8, 2022)

hachu21 said:


> For low light shots, don't forget that f/1.8-2.8 on 1" sensor is equivalent to f/3.0-4.7 on an Canon APSC sensor. Still brighter but not far off the 15-45 f/3.5-6.3 kit lens. With the added possibility of brighter primes.
> But I also get the convenience of a all-in-one package.


Not that whole equivalence argument again. I refuse to play this time, other than to say that it is and it isn’t.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 8, 2022)

scyrene said:


> I mean... you were wrong. That's about the most begrudging way to admit it, but at least you did. No need to lash out. Being factually incorrect isn't "disagreeing". Neuro can be strident and brusque but he's tirelessly countered nonsense* on this site longer than I've been here.
> 
> *not calling your statements nonsense, I haven't paid close enough attention to what you've been saying tbh


I'll be the first to admit that I'm not always right, and I don't have any issue with being pointed to correct information, and would have been totally happy with continuing a discussion about the differences that were pointed out, however, calling someone else an idiot? What really is the purpose of that? It's not to further the discussion, and since it went there, it was clear that there was no more discussion to be had.


----------



## stevelee (May 8, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> I upgraded a G7x-II to the G5x-II. Although the G5x is less "pocketable"; the EVF is handy and I find the autofocus better. Very nice results.
> 
> Yeah, I like the fast lens. . . . but I am not a fan of the distortion at the wide end.


The 7 would fit in my shirt pocket if nothing else was in there. (Usually I carry my phone and some reading glasses there.) The 5 does fine for me in a jacket or pants pocket.

The lens correction in Adobe Camera Raw pretty well takes care of the distortion for me. In rare instances I will tweak the correction a bit.


----------



## stevelee (May 8, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Agreed. For me, no travel solution would work without something wider than 24mm (FF equivalent framing). I have used the PowerShot S95/S100 as walkaround pocket cameras for casual family outings, but the iPhone camera is now good enough to server that purpose.


I used the S90 and then the S120 before I got the G cameras. Years ago I was quite serious about photography, and found that when I traveled, taking pictures got in the way of my seeing and doing the things that I traveled there for. So I went for some years taking no camera along at all. That was before I had a cell phone. Then I got a rather basic film camera for trips and found that I could trust myself not to let it get in the way of things. So for me, leaving my best gear at home is a feature. Even so, when I got the G5X II, I soon went to Italy for a little over two weeks and from there then took a 14-night cruise to western Mediterranean ports, including more towns in Italy, and I took over 3,000 pictures. That’s less than 100 pictures a day, and so didn’t really interfere with my sightseeing.

My friend who traveled with me on that trip left his good Nikon gear at home and just used his iPhone. Some of his panoramas with the phone on that trip and previous ones with his son were so good that he had me print a few up on 13” wide roll paper and had them framed. I still prefer to have the flexibility of a dedicated camera and the options offered in ACR. He has a more upscale iPhone than mine. I prefer to put the money into a camera rather than getting a top iPhone (much bigger than I want to carry) to upgrade the camera. As the ship left Venice at dark I took pictures from our balcony that I doubt would have fared as well with a phone camera.

But from your comments, I think were I to carry my DSLR and a host of lenses, I might want to get the 17mm TS-E. The shift makes for more stitchable shots than just rotating the camera. Obviously the tilt would be nice for shooting buildings, too.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 8, 2022)

stevelee said:


> But from your comments, I think were I to carry my DSLR and a host of lenses, I might want to get the 17mm TS-E. The shift makes for more stitchable shots than just rotating the camera. Obviously the tilt would be nice for shooting buildings, too.


TS-E lenses are great for architecture, although mostly that's shift. If you're close to a tall building, pointing a regular lens up causes keystoning (the building looks trapezoidal), but keeping the camera level and using shift keeps the vertical lines vertical. Here's an example of the exterior of the Cathédrale Saint-Gatien de Tours, the image on the left is not mine but was clearly taken with a standard lens pointed up, the one on the right is mine with the TS-E 17 and shift. Software correction for keystoning has gotten pretty good, but since I have TS-E lenses I'll stick with the optical correction. 






You can use shift for stitching as well, getting two shots that are perfectly aligned out of the camera is nice. Stitching with the TS-E 17 gives you an 11mm FoV. However, be aware that if you need the shift to correct the verticals, you can't also use shift for stitching since the shot shifted the other way will make the verticals even worse for that part of the image.

I rarely find tilt useful for architecture, mainly since building facades are flat. Tilt allows you to change the angle of the focal plane so a flat surface that is not parallel to the sensor can be all in focus. Classic use is for landscapes where with tilt you can get the foreground and distant areas in focus without stopping down too much.

I do have one example of a facade where I used shift and tilt – shift to effectively move the camera away from the building (I was on the sidewalk right in front) and tilt so everything from the top of the gate to the tower above was in focus. This is the Basel Rathaus, city hall in Basel, Switzerland:


----------



## yungfat (May 8, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> I have both the M5 and an RP. Sitting them side by side, the m5 is actually taller than the RP. The RP is a little wider, and deeper, but not by much, and even more interestingly, the RP with the RF 50 STM lens weighs a whopping 5 ounces more than the M5 with the 21 STM lens. The RP is already very close to flagship M size and could pretty easily get a slight shave here and there to get it even more svelte.
> View attachment 203409
> 
> View attachment 203410
> ...


Thanks for showing the actual comparison.
I can only tell based on what I can remember.
So the Rp is the answer for M5ii.
If Canon rollout a series of pancake lenses would be awesome!


----------



## stevelee (May 8, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> TS-E lenses are great for architecture, although mostly that's shift. If you're close to a tall building, pointing a regular lens up causes keystoning (the building looks trapezoidal), but keeping the camera level and using shift keeps the vertical lines vertical. Here's an example of the exterior of the Cathédrale Saint-Gatien de Tours, the image on the left is not mine but was clearly taken with a standard lens pointed up, the one on the right is mine with the TS-E 17 and shift. Software correction for keystoning has gotten pretty good, but since I have TS-E lenses I'll stick with the optical correction.


Yes, I use ACR corrections to make vertical lines vertical. Most of the time it does great, and for the most part I am posting my travel pictures on my web site, so the loss of resolution is not a problem. 

I rented the 24mm TS-E first and did well with it. I found that the 17mm was harder for me to learn to use, and I didn't get very good in the short time I had it. Interiors in my house looked almost like something out of Escher. I realize that there are real estate photographers who use it all the time, so with a lot of practice I might get good at it. If I purchased one of them, it would definitely be the 24mm. The 17mm for me did a great job for stitching. I couldn't have got the whole building in the picture below with just one 17mm shot. If I moved back, trees would have been in the way:



There is a bit of distortion on the right I could spiff up in Photoshop and maybe touch up verticals on the left, but for a quick experiment, it is not bad. The reduction for the web seems to have lost a lot of sharpness, too, but you get the idea.

I used the tilt more with the 24mm. I made pseudo-Ansel Adams shots such as one with everything from a rock near a leg of the tripod to a waterfall fountain in that park all in focus. I then converted it to black and white and printed it on my printer that has black, "light-black," and "light-light-black" ink cartridges. A park in my neighborhood was as close as I came to Yosemite during our COVID lock down.


----------



## Sporgon (May 8, 2022)

adrian_bacon said:


> I have both the M5 and an RP. Sitting them side by side, the m5 is actually taller than the RP. The RP is a little wider, and deeper, but not by much, and even more interestingly, the RP with the RF 50 STM lens weighs a whopping 5 ounces more than the M5 with the 21 STM lens. The RP is already very close to flagship M size and could pretty easily get a slight shave here and there to get it even more svelte.
> View attachment 203409
> 
> View attachment 203410
> ...


I would agree with your assessment between the relative sizes when you have a small prime lens mounted on the RP. The trouble is the relationship soon changes when you start putting zooms on the RP compared with the equivalent zooms on the M5; that’s when the RP becomes much bigger, heavier and bulkier than the APS M5. This is where the difference in what you can do regarding small and light with APS compared with FF begins to hit home. If I want to have a small, lightweight camera then the RP with the RF 50/1.8 or EF 40/2.8 is great, but why not carry my G1XIII instead, offering even less bulk and weight but more flexibility and IQ that is virtually indistinguishable most of the time, excluding shallow DOF ? In fact it’s the latter I mostly do. I do like the RP, but find it is difficult to exploit its small sized body to the full.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (May 8, 2022)

MythPlayer said:


> But
> 
> Nah，In store page all M6II model marked [Sell ended]，cannot add to cart.
> btw，canon japan website camera lineup page marked M6II [few stock left] from february


----------



## Otara (May 8, 2022)

If Japan has, perhaps thats a fairly significant second country?


----------



## David - Sydney (May 9, 2022)

LogicExtremist said:


> Yes, the Canon EOS M6 Mark II is being discontinued, and it's not in Russia!
> 
> So which countries has the Canon EOS M6 Mark II is being discontinued in? Searching though Canon US, CAN, UK, AU, and their retailers we find:
> US - available
> ...


I concur. Although Canon Australia still lists the M6ii on their website with "buy", there is no list of retailers in the Where To Buy section
https://www.canon.com.au/cameras/eos-m6-mark-ii

All the retailers don't list it at all except for DCW that has the kits as Not Available or another on "Back Order"
https://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/?rf=kw&kw=canon+m6

It may be that it wasn't selling well in the Australian market but generally Australia has the full range of Canon products.
Unless.... Canon Australia has sold out of their local stock and are waiting for a replacement M6iii !!


----------



## OneSnark (May 9, 2022)

I hear the argument for Tilt-Shift lenses. I run into the architecture problem ALL the time when travelling. A 24mm Tilt on a FF body. . .yeah. . that's the stuff. 
I hear the case for wide angles.

The use case here is for _travel _which for me means that I am likely 5 to 10 time zones from home and hoofing it 5-10 hours a day.
What I have on me; that's it. And I will have it on me. . . for 10+ hours a day walking everywhere. . . even when not shooting. 
My nightmare scenario was when I brought a camera bag with a dSLR and 3 lenses. The other half brought a dSLR and 3 lenses. When not in use. . . .I was carrying both bodies and all six lenses. 
Not doing THAT again.

So a great T/S is a nice dream. But effectively. . .when traveling. . .I need to cover the ~10 to 100 range (APS-C) with the minimum kit and weight while still getting the best quality. So. . . .my dSLR with a bunch of fast primes and tilt-shifts. . . .is not gonna cut it.
The Phones are ok. . .better all the time. . .but still fall apart in low light. 

So that was my use case for the "M" line. Top notch APS-C sensor. . . and hopefully reasonable glass I could carry around all day.
The M 11-24 did have good reviews. . . .I remember that now. . . .but there was no decent lens that got me to the 100ish range. Short of bringing a EF converter and my trusty 24-105/4L. . . .which was exactly the lens I was hoping to leave home. 

Hencs. . the G5x. A compromise.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 9, 2022)

Sporgon said:


> I would agree with your assessment between the relative sizes when you have a small prime lens mounted on the RP. The trouble is the relationship soon changes when you start putting zooms on the RP compared with the equivalent zooms on the M5; that’s when the RP becomes much bigger, heavier and bulkier than the APS M5. This is where the difference in what you can do regarding small and light with APS compared with FF begins to hit home. If I want to have a small, lightweight camera then the RP with the RF 50/1.8 or EF 40/2.8 is great, but why not carry my G1XIII instead, offering even less bulk and weight but more flexibility and IQ that is virtually indistinguishable most of the time, excluding shallow DOF ? In fact it’s the latter I mostly do. I do like the RP, but find it is difficult to exploit its small sized body to the full.


No disagreement from me there, other than if I really want small and light, zooms aren't generally the way to go. Yes, the M series zooms are tiny compared to RF zooms, comically so, but I've never been happy with them and prefer to carry one or two appropriate primes for what I think I'm going to be shooting. It's all compromise at the end of the day.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 9, 2022)

yungfat said:


> Thanks for showing the actual comparison.
> I can only tell based on what I can remember.
> So the Rp is the answer for M5ii.
> If Canon rollout a series of pancake lenses would be awesome!


I don't know if I'd go so far as to call it the answer. They desperately need smaller lenses, especially in the zoom range, and I'd love to see a line of compact pancake primes, but the RP isn't that far off from the M5 at least. The M6II would be smaller by a bunch as it has no viewfinder, and the grip isn't nearly as nice as the RP.


----------



## unfocused (May 9, 2022)

Just to recap. It looks like in Australia and Japan there are indications that the M6 is being discontinued. Is that correct?


----------



## eosuser1234 (May 9, 2022)

i got tired of waiting for a M5 Mark2 replacement so I sold my EOS-M cameras, and EF mounts and went straight to RF line. I think a lot of others here in Japan followed. EF cameras are available now for super super cheap.


----------



## stevelee (May 9, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> Hencs. . the G5x. A compromise.


I reached the same conclusion. Everything is a compromise, size, weight, quality, complexity, convenience, vertical convergence, etc., etc. I have the additional psychological factors. Is the trip the point of the trip, or is photography the point of the trip? It is likely that with a lot of gear that photography becomes the point of the trip, whatever was my original intent. In 2000 I allowed myself to take a small camera with me for the first time in years. I mostly did OK until I got to Prague. Luckily (?), I found a shop beside the Charles Bridge that still sold slide film. It became a frequent stop for me. I still don't completely trust myself, though I am not as serious about photography as I once was. But if I ever go back to Prague, photography will likely be the point of the trip there, well, and probably sampling different beers, and I'm not that much of a beer drinker. I'll take along many gigabytes of SD cards.


----------



## adrian_bacon (May 9, 2022)

eosuser1234 said:


> i got tired of waiting for a M5 Mark2 replacement so I sold my EOS-M cameras, and EF mounts and went straight to RF line. I think a lot of others here in Japan followed. EF cameras are available now for super super cheap.


Same here. I haven't gotten rid of the M5 just yet, and do still occasionally use it when I know ~35mm FOV is all I'll need and I want as small and light as possible, but after trying out the RP, my EF DSLRs and EF glass disappeared and I cycled in all RF bodies and glass. All my EF-M glass except the 22 prime on the M5 also went away. Had Canon actually released an M5II, I'd still probably be fully into the M system, but, they didn't, and the M50II, while nice, just isn't the same.


----------



## lote82 (May 9, 2022)

Read the news (CR3) ... goodbye M6, hello R7!


----------



## OneSnark (May 10, 2022)

lote82 said:


> Read the news (CR3) ... goodbye M6, hello R7!



Yeah. . . .15 fps with IBS. . .I suspect this camera may cost more than you are thinking. 

But THAT is not the issue.

The issue will be: What lenses do you put on this body?
* I bet we will see some "meh" EF-S glass (18-55 and 55-200)
* At 3x the ef-s cost
* without image stabilization. . .because you already paid for it in the body

. . . which pushes you right back to the RF 4L glass. . . .which is as heavy as the EF equivalents at a notably higher price. 

Sorry. Need to take a happy pill


----------



## lote82 (May 10, 2022)

OneSnark said:


> Yeah. . . .15 fps with IBS. . .I suspect this camera may cost more than you are thinking.
> 
> But THAT is not the issue.
> 
> ...


1. I own a 7D II and regarding the specs I don't think the price of the R7 will surprise me or any other seriously interested person.

2. For the beginning I will adapt some lenses like 15-85mm, 16-300mm and (most important) 150-600mm on it. All these lenses you can't (or will ever) find in "meh" M-system. Nobody knows how the future RF-S lenses will be, but I think they will be more impressive than anything M had to offer!

3. "3x the ef-s cost" and "without image stabilization" come straight out of your pill spoiled imagination. Didn't you know that IBIS and lens stabilisation can work together? ... Not even a base for discussion ...

Sorry, but I think you should rename to ThreeSnark!


----------



## lustyd (May 10, 2022)

lote82 said:


> 2. For the beginning I will adapt some lenses like 15-85mm, 16-300mm and (most important) 150-600mm on it. All these lenses you can't (or will ever) find in "meh" M-system. Nobody knows how the future RF-S lenses will be, but I think they will be more impressive than anything M had to offer!


So you’re clearly not the target market for M then, why comment about M? You immediately think the M lenses are worse than others but ignore their value prop entirely. The reason those lenses aren’t on M mount is because they can’t be made small enough to meet the requirements. The entire value of M is size, at the cost of some speed or whatever. For a huge number of us that’s a good thing. Modern cameras make up for the speed quite well anyway so it’s not the issue it used to be, we don’t all need perfection some of us need a compact capture device.

I had no choice at all but to buy the M body to get small lenses, you have the option of M, R, EF because your chosen (massive) lenses work with all of them albeit with adapters. For me, the main thing holding me back from buying an R body is the large lenses and bodies. If they introduce a smaller body I would still have to buy an M until they release the smaller lenses.


----------



## pashevich (May 10, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> It would have been relatively simple for them to make the RF flange distance sightly longer to accommodate an RF-M adapter.
> 
> But you may be correct that even a few millimeters would have meant more design compromises than they were willing to make.
> 
> Still, optically it would certainly have been possible for them to make an RF mount compatible with M cameras, If that was the most important consideration involved in the decision. The fact remains that they chose not to do so.


L


----------



## lote82 (May 10, 2022)

lustyd said:


> So you’re clearly not the target market for M then, why comment about M? You immediately think the M lenses are worse than others but ignore their value prop entirely. The reason those lenses aren’t on M mount is because they can’t be made small enough to meet the requirements. The entire value of M is size, at the cost of some speed or whatever. For a huge number of us that’s a good thing. Modern cameras make up for the speed quite well anyway so it’s not the issue it used to be, we don’t all need perfection some of us need a compact capture device.
> 
> I had no choice at all but to buy the M body to get small lenses, you have the option of M, R, EF because your chosen (massive) lenses work with all of them albeit with adapters. For me, the main thing holding me back from buying an R body is the large lenses and bodies. If they introduce a smaller body I would still have to buy an M until they release the smaller lenses.


1. Of course I'm "not the target market for M"! I never pretended to be!

2. Someone was trash-talking about EF-S (and assumed RF-S) lenses. I answered him with the hint that M is lacking a lot what EF-S is offering. Just to give an example: I think it's a shame that M never offered (or ever will) zooms like 15-85mm or 16-300mm!

3. M was build around small/light/cheap and therefore limited. Not giving upgrade path to FF and (even more important) to modern RF tele-lenses made the system a dead end street. Not giving lenses above 200mm (while not giving battery grip which would be very useful for adapting EF teles) is RIDICULOUS.
If APS-C wants to survive it has to offer more!

M users tend to think that APS-C should be only about small/light/cheap. You seem to miss the fact that a "huge number" use smartphones exactly therefore. To nearly every subject in photography you already find good examples of pictures made with smartphone ... Except wildlife (or long tele photography in general)!

This doesn't mean there is no market for small/cheap/light. But you alone are not a "huge number" anymore.

R7 will offer what smartphones can't offer, M doesn't want to offer and FF could offer (while therefore being too heavy and expensive!). R7 is finally closing the gap between two extremes. Next step will be small/light/cheap RF APS-C cameras.
Will they be bigger and heavier than M cameras? Probably ... but I think not as much as you should worry about!

Giving more options (in one mount) is a good thing ... for both sides!
The small/light/cheap fraction will get upgrade path to bigger (tele-)lenses and/or cameras (with bigger sensors).
The big/heavy/expensive fraction will get "downgrade" path to smaller cameras (with smaller sensors) and/or lenses.

Time has changed. I waited a very long time for a 7D successor to come. Now you have to wait for the successor of M50/M5/M6 ...
While waiting I hope you won't have to listen to the same amount of bulls*** I was forced to listen to!


----------



## lote82 (May 10, 2022)

I should have become prophet! 









Here is what Canon is announcing next, including the EOS R7, EOS R10 and RF-S lenses [CR3]


It looks like we have a few surprises on our hands from Canon, as they gear up to announce new products this month, which is another pleasant surprise. Canon




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## lustyd (May 10, 2022)

lote82 said:


> 1. Of course I'm "not the target market for M"! I never pretended to be!
> 
> 2. Someone was trash-talking about EF-S (and assumed RF-S) lenses. I answered him with the hint that M is lacking a lot what EF-S is offering. Just to give an example: I think it's a shame that M never offered (or ever will) zooms like 15-85mm or 16-300mm!
> 
> ...


I think you misunderstood their post, to me it was clear that they were saying RF has large and expensive lenses, and that if they make RF-S those will be large and cheap, still leaving an M sized gap.

You're now saying FF is an upgrade, and that's true if your requirements match FF. Not everyone needs or wants FF, and for me it's a no-go because of the size/weight of the lenses. That makes FF a downgrade for me. Same for those wanting longer reach from their lenses, it's not a good thing to make lenses wider in all circumstances.

M Users can think what we like. APS-C isn't the point of M, there are EF-S cameras with APS-C too. M is very specifically about size and portability, it's not even cheap in many instances, and neither does it need to be - I'd have bought the M6ii body at twice the price because it's what I needed.

I am a part of a huge number, just not photographers. Vlogging has different needs, and Canon are filling that need with M. Sony fill it with ZV-E10 (or did until they stopped making them due to lack of chips). Vloggers and streamers represent a much, much larger market than photographers in 2022 so if anything Canon would do better to improve M and drop the RF series - there is orders of magnitude more money to be made there.

Agree, options with a mount is a good thing. Unfortunately the FF support of RF means lenses can't ever be as small as M mount because the mount is physically bigger which would mean bodies have to be physically bigger. Adding that size goes against the design philosophy of small, light and convenient.

Yes, times have changed, the world has moved on from stills photography to content generation for Twitch/YouTube/Instagram/etc. and those need very different things. Manufacturers will go where the money is, and content creation is that place. Game streaming alone counts for more revenue opportunity than all of the major sports in the USA combined.


----------



## OneSnark (May 10, 2022)

Happy pills and (more importantly) a full night's sleep has improved my disposition.

I was overly harsh on the EF-S lenses. . . . I have shot a number of the kit EF-S lenses, and the 10-22/EF-S is in my day kit.

My point was I strongly doubt we are going to see a higher-than-kit quality F4 lens in a reduced size RF-S mount; lest it cannibalize the full size RF lens sales.
We are likely to see only standard kit lenses. . .and I suspect. . . . . if one looks at the cost of the EF lenses to the RF equivalents. . .we are going to say a eye-watering price increase (*especially* considering current inflation).

Would an EF-M 24-70/F4 zoom really have been all that big? That's what was missing from that lineup.

And yes. . .I think I am ALSO not in the target market for the EF-M.  I probably am in the RF-S target market - - - buy the R7 with RF "L" lenses. BUT I just got priced out (not willing to step up)


----------



## stevelee (May 10, 2022)

lote82 said:


> 3. "3x the ef-s cost" and "without image stabilization" come straight out of your pill spoiled imagination. Didn't you know that IBIS and lens stabilisation can work together?


Of course they can. But the point was cost. They can cut corners by leaving out stabilization in the lens and save money. You have IBIS to take care of you. And IBIS is supposedly more effective with wider lenses anyhow. And you are likely to use wider lenses when you have the crop factor, other than when you are using it for "reach." And in that case with longer lenses you use a tripod or for handheld you supposedly do better with the lens taking care of it than with IBIS alone. But they can make affordable kit lenses without IS.

My EF-S 10–22mm lens doesn't have IS at all, and of course neither do my Rebel bodies. I never missed it. Admittedly I was using a tripod when shooting interiors for a Realtor.

Many years ago an online friend (dating back to Compuserve forums in the '80s) who works in a camera store recommended that when I went to DSLRs that I get a Sony body. I would save bundles of money by not having IS in the lenses. Back then he did have a point I thought, but I didn't take his advice.


----------



## grantmasterflash (May 10, 2022)

The one thing that the M-naysayers don't understand. We EOS-M owners don't care about EF-M, we care about size. IF Canon can make an RF mount camera that's as small as an EF-M then we will buy it, it's that simple. It may be possible to make an RF body as small as an M6 II since the body is larger than the mount on that camera. However, the lenses will always be bigger no matter what they do. Look at EF-S lenses in comparison to EF-M lenses, they're huge. I think Canon wanted to get away from making two different types of lenses and their only choice now is to make two different types of lenses. I predict their "replacement for EF-M" will be a major compromise and they'll only make a couple of kit RF-S lenses and just try to get people to move to a larger camera and instead they'll probably move to Fuji.
Canon is really screwed if they do and screwed if they don't. There really isn't a good solution outside of them making a bunch of tiny APS-C lenses which they won't do.


----------



## Durf (May 12, 2022)

Those that have never used the M6 Mark II really don't understand what a great little camera this is (with the right lenses).
Over the last year or so I slowly moved away from the Canon system, mainly due to the fact that I'm getting older and the new RF system's lenses that I wanted are too big, heavy, and way to expensive. 
I kept the M6 Mark II with a nice collection of good EF-M lenses due to it's compact size and great optical performance with certain lenses. The 32mp sensor is rather amazing to say the least. 
I have two M6ii's and they'll likely out last me and my knees and back enjoy them! Sad to see this Canon line being phased out.


----------



## SnowMiku (May 13, 2022)

People may start selling their M gear with this news, it might be a good time to get a bargain in the used market.


----------



## Kit Chan (May 13, 2022)

LSXPhotog said:


> I had an X-E4 and about 8 months later also added an X-T4...then I became so frustrated with the X-E4's screen issue I sold it and got the X-T30II when it was released this January. Both of those cameras, the X-T4 and X-T30II represent the best Fujifilm has to offer in terms of the camera's autofocusing. I've found both cameras to be pretty unreliable with tracking as the cameras often will be locked on a subject and then go check on something else for a while, before returning or losing the subject entirely. Face Detection is so inconsistent and completely uncontrollable (other than selecting another face it "finds" in the frame) that you should leave that feature off 100% of the time...this is an area the M6II was a monster with. It's so bad that I honestly believe they shouldn't even list it as something the camera can even do.
> 
> Unfortunately, it's not JUST with AF-C tracking.....with shooting real estate, I've shot with the 5D Mark IV, M6II, R6, R5, and R3 using Dual Pixel for probably 5+ years. I have maybe missed focus less than 10 times after AF confirmation in some normal/poorly lit rooms. I used the X-T4 and XF10-24 for 3 listings so far and it has missed multiple times in each home I shot. So it's a very big surprise to me, given my experience autofocusing in the typical poor light I come across.
> 
> So you may ask "then why do you still use these cameras if they focus as poorly as I say?" Because I've never had more fun using any digital camera than I have using any Fuji camera and lens. It's absolutely fun to take photos and allows me to separate my work gear and fun gear. I don't regret finding the "goldilocks" camera for me from Fuji.


Sounds like I should stick with Canon if I like the AF then. I'm nervous about investing in the M6II with it's shutter shock issues though. Digging into the menus to change between mechanical and electronic shutter don't appeal to me as that just brings me back to one of my biggest complaints about my M200; I spend too much time in menus when just want to flick some exposure dials and take a photo.


----------



## LSXPhotog (May 13, 2022)

Kit Chan said:


> Sounds like I should stick with Canon if I like the AF then. I'm nervous about investing in the M6II with it's shutter shock issues though. Digging into the menus to change between mechanical and electronic shutter don't appeal to me as that just brings me back to one of my biggest complaints about my M200; I spend too much time in menus when just want to flick some exposure dials and take a photo.


It depends on what you are trying to focus on. If you're just going to use the camera for landscape, street, travel, I find the cameras very manageable. But whenever I try to focus on things like birds or my dog, the camera lose their minds. Face tracking is totally useless on Fujifilm cameras, however.


----------



## Chrisinhouston (May 14, 2022)

I jumped on the Canon M bandwagon with the very first model, later added an M3 with the EVF and eventually sold those and settled on 2 M5 bodies which I use a lot for travel photography. I own several EF-M lenses as well as lots of other EF ones that I use via the adapter. When you are dealing with international travel and the hassle that goes with bringing carry on items on a flight the M just works better for me. I also own the R and several RF lenses and an aging 7D MkII. But they all have their place, I shoot with the R when doing things locally, especially portraits of family, landscape, macro and astrophotography. The 7D MkII is for sports (I have a lot of high school age grand kids) and for wildlife where I want a faster burst rate. For that I don't mind the APS-C sensor and like the extra reach it gives me with longer lenses. 

I am excited at the prospect of a R7 to replace my old DSLR but I have no plans to give up my M5 system as it is smaller than the others I mentioned, lighter and easy to travel with and what's more they produce good quality images.


----------



## candyman (May 14, 2022)

Chrisinhouston said:


> I jumped on the Canon M bandwagon with the very first model, later added an M3 with the EVF and eventually sold those and settled on 2 M5 bodies which I use a lot for travel photography. I own several EF-M lenses as well as lots of other EF ones that I use via the adapter. When you are dealing with international travel and the hassle that goes with bringing carry on items on a flight the M just works better for me. I also own the R and several RF lenses and an aging 7D MkII. But they all have their place, I shoot with the R when doing things locally, especially portraits of family, landscape, macro and astrophotography. The 7D MkII is for sports (I have a lot of high school age grand kids) and for wildlife where I want a faster burst rate. For that I don't mind the APS-C sensor and like the extra reach it gives me with longer lenses.
> 
> I am excited at the prospect of a R7 to replace my old DSLR but I have no plans to give up my M5 system as it is smaller than the others I mentioned, lighter and easy to travel with and what's more they produce good quality images.


I concur. Using M5, M6 II (plus a few EF-M lenses) next to R6 and 6D MK II & EF lenses


----------



## Kit Chan (May 15, 2022)

LSXPhotog said:


> It depends on what you are trying to focus on. If you're just going to use the camera for landscape, street, travel, I find the cameras very manageable. But whenever I try to focus on things like birds or my dog, the camera lose their minds. Face tracking is totally useless on Fujifilm cameras, however.


Seeing as my first paid photography job is a photo album of the family dog, and I'm planning to put up some bird prints for sale, I think I'll take the better tracking.

I am a bit anxious about using electronic shutter mode for shuttershock free photos though, doesn't ES have trouble with artificial lighting?


----------



## gregedwards69 (May 16, 2022)

grantmasterflash said:


> The one thing that the M-naysayers don't understand. We EOS-M owners don't care about EF-M, we care about size. IF Canon can make an RF mount camera that's as small as an EF-M then we will buy it, it's that simple.


Please don't speak for all EOS M owners. Some of us are mere hobbyists who don't have the disposable income to plonk down a considerable chunk of money on moving to a new camera mount. Some of us do care about EF-M and what's going to become of it.


----------



## gregedwards69 (May 16, 2022)

SnowMiku said:


> People may start selling their M gear with this news, it might be a good time to get a bargain in the used market.


That's what I'm hoping for. Despite what I said about lack of disposable income in my previous post above (which is a temporary setback due to wife's covid related complications), if EF-M bargains come up, I'm more likely to buy those and use them until my camera dies than invest in a whole new system. A little bit of me is tempted to get on original M body and stick my 22mm on it as a "compact" camera. I hear the original M has something special about its colour rendering, which some say was lost in later models. Something to do with digic versions and the original's firmware being closer to EOS and the later model being closer to Powershot's firmware. Apparently, Magic Lantern runs on the original M too.


----------



## Czardoom (May 17, 2022)

SnowMiku said:


> People may start selling their M gear with this news, it might be a good time to get a bargain in the used market.





InchMetric said:


> What would we do without people reminding us that we are hearing Canon rumors on a site called Canon Rumors?
> 
> It would be less of a cringe if you simply shared whether or not you agreed with the rumor.


As it turns out, people reminding folks that this is a rumor falls on many deaf ears. Just look at how many folks are calling this "news" and are making plans one way or another to either buy an M6 II while they still can or planning on selling off their M gear.

The real question is, what would we do without people like you who feel the need to mock and criticize a perfectly reasonable post?


----------



## bf (May 28, 2022)

M cameras haven't received the Digic X processor and are still offerd at the intriductory price, which is not good. 11-22, 22, 32, 55-200 or 18-150 is about 1.5-2k of investment in lenses, which is not easy to give up for enthusiasts who don't earn anything from photography. I do hope a M6-mk3 is offered or at least the pricing is adjusted for available bodies, which are a generation old.


----------



## Act444 (May 29, 2022)

gregedwards69 said:


> I hear the original M has something special about its colour rendering, which some say was lost in later models. Something to do with digic versions and the original's firmware being closer to EOS and the later model being closer to Powershot's firmware.


I'm one of those who agrees that older Canon sensors had far superior OOC colors, sharpness and color rendition. I don't think it has anything to do with firmware though; I think this change happened when Canon came out with the Dual Pixel technology and tweaked their sensors to answer the critics that were constantly on their back regarding dynamic range. The 5D4 and 7D2 I believe were some of the first cameras to adopt this feature. I notice with my 5D4 and especially with my RP I tend to spend more time in PP fixing and tweaking colors (and sharpness) than I do with my 5DSR and did with my previous 5D3. Even then, I can't quite get it the same (especially with reds). I believe the 5DS series of cameras (2015) was the last DSLR generation to use the older sensor with the "classic colors". I find myself going back to it lately...

The original M (which I had) had the older "classic" sensor. Note, however, that it does focus/track slower than the newer Ms (even with the firmware update).


----------

