# Canon confirms discontinuation of EF and EF-S lenses



## canonnews (Feb 13, 2022)

> In a report from PetaPixel, more information about the discontinuing of Canon EF and EF-S lenses has become apparent.  While here at CanonRumors we’ve already labeled most of these lenses as discontinued.  But, investigating this more and it’s painfully noticeable that slews of EF and EF-S lenses are now officially on a discontinued page for Canon Japan.
> 
> As CanonNews mentions;
> Currently, Canon Japan has 27 EF lenses, 6 EF-S lenses, and 7 EOS-M lenses available.  Everything else is on a page called “生産終了した商品情報” which machine translates into “Discontinued Product Information”.
> Before when I at least looked at this, Canon was tagging these lenses as “not available” or “back ordered”, however, now, there’s no doubt that...



Continue reading...


----------



## entoman (Feb 13, 2022)

If 6 EF-S lenses are still in production, that might indicate the Canon still intends to release (or at least, continue manufacturing) APS-C DSLRs. Even the lowest priced new RF model will likely be at least twice the cost of a budget crop DSLR.

It's no surprise to me that M lenses continue to be produced, as the cameras sell extremely well, especially in Asia.


----------



## masterpix (Feb 13, 2022)

canonnews said:


> Continue reading...


In the old days, Canon started to introduce the EOS line and changed the mount from FD to EF, while making the change they stopped making FD glass. But unlike these days, it was not possible to convert FD glass to EF while today it is easy without loosing image quality.


----------



## Maps (Feb 13, 2022)

Guys... c'mon... seriously?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2022)

Maps said:


> View attachment 202476
> 
> 
> Guys... c'mon... seriously?


Yes, seriously. But then, many on this forum seem to think EF-S and EF-M are dead. Probably they also think that very small rocks float.

Have a look at the top 6 best-selling ILCs in Japan last month:






Two M-series MILCs on top, and three APS-C DSLRs close behind, four of the five kitted with two EF-M or EF-S lenses.

But hey, probably just a flesh wound.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 13, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yes, seriously. But then, many on this forum seem to think EF-S and EF-M are dead. Probably they also think that very small rocks float.








Solving the mystery of floating rocks


Scientists uncover how pumice can remain buoyant for years.




www.universityofcalifornia.edu


----------



## perplex1 (Feb 13, 2022)

sooooo i guess ill ask. which lenses are still in production?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2022)

AlanF said:


> Solving the mystery of floating rocks
> 
> 
> Scientists uncover how pumice can remain buoyant for years.
> ...


Somehow I doubt John Cleese’s peasant character was thinking of pumice. Especially since his final guess for something that floats was lead.


----------



## entoman (Feb 13, 2022)

perplex1 said:


> sooooo i guess ill ask. which lenses are still in production?


The 9 EF *primes* still in production are:

24mm F1.4L ii
35mm F1.4L ii
50mm F1.2L
50mm F1.4
50mm F1.8
85mm F1.4L
85mm F1.8
400mm F2.8L iii
600mm F4L iii

I haven't seen any mention of *zooms* being discontinued.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Feb 13, 2022)

1. It is meaningful, I think, that EF-M lenses are still in production

2. It seems to me, when I read the 'EF-M bodies are dead' comments on this forum, that many of those who hold those opinions WANT the EF-M format buried. I do not understand that logic...at all...unless (leading to #3)

3. ...unless they have never used the M6MkII--which is a marvelous camera. In fact, may I supply the following thought: Most of the EF-M naysayers have never owned any EF-M camera...and probably never will. That's OK with me...and my entire family, including two daughters who have become quite skilled with their M's

4. Even with Canon introducing a cropped-sensor body that accepts RF lenses, there is still a place for updates to the best-selling M's


----------



## entoman (Feb 13, 2022)

josephandrews222 said:


> 2. It seems to me, when I read the 'EF-M bodies are dead' comments on this forum, that many of those who hold those opinions WANT the EF-M format buried.


There will always be people who delight in predicting doom. Most of the time they get it wrong.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> There will always be people who delight in predicting doom. Most of the time they get it wrong.


The M5 was a delight to use, the only small body camera I could use, as a large handed person with proper ergonomics. The wishes and demand for a Mkll is somewhat akin (but in a much smaller way) to the sentiment for a 7D mirrorless.


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> The 9 EF primes still in production are:
> 
> 24mm F1.4L ii
> 35mm F1.4L ii
> ...


Canon no longer manufactures the TS-E lenses, though some are new (5yo), and only two are even rumored to be replaced?

I can see Canon reusing the optical formula with new body & electronics, but I'd expect a rumor saying Canon is going to release the whole bunch in TS-R.


----------



## entoman (Feb 13, 2022)

Antono Refa said:


> Canon no longer manufactures the TS-E lenses, though some are new (5yo), and only two are even rumored to be replaced?
> 
> I can see Canon reusing the optical formula with new body & electronics, but I'd expect a rumor saying Canon is going to release the whole bunch in TS-R.


I use the extremely sharp TS-E 24mm ii on my R5. There are loads of them in pristine condition available secondhand (in the UK) because a lot of people buy them new but then find that they hardly ever use them. The old TS-E lenses are manual focus of course, but shooting architecture or landscapes is rarely a hurried affair, so I don't miss the AF, and I wouldn't be prepared to pay the high cost of RF versions with AF.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 13, 2022)

Antono Refa said:


> Canon no longer manufactures the TS-E lenses, though some are new (5yo), and only two are even rumored to be replaced?
> 
> I can see Canon reusing the optical formula with new body & electronics, but I'd expect a rumor saying Canon is going to release the whole bunch in TS-R.



They still have the TS-E17, 24, 50, 90 and 135mm in production.

it's the older ones that were discontinued.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> I haven't seen any mention of *zooms* being discontinued.


EF 24-70 F4L and EF 24-105 IS STM are discontinued.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 13, 2022)

perplex1 said:


> sooooo i guess ill ask. which lenses are still in production?


according to Japan: https://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/

I'll put that in the article though.


----------



## Maps (Feb 13, 2022)

josephandrews222 said:


> 1. It is meaningful, I think, that EF-M lenses are still in production
> 
> 2. It seems to me, when I read the 'EF-M bodies are dead' comments on this forum, that many of those who hold those opinions WANT the EF-M format buried. I do not understand that logic...at all...unless (leading to #3)
> 
> ...



For what it's worth I have the original M50 and a handful of M mount lenses and I think they're brilliant in the right situation. Fantastic value for money. But that doesn't change my opinion that Canon gave up on the M mount 3 years ago. Sales volume and profit are two totally different things unfortunately. I'd love to see them bring the M mount back, but how anyone can be holding out hope at this point is beyond me.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 13, 2022)

Maps said:


> For what it's worth I have the original M50 and a handful of M mount lenses and I think they're brilliant in the right situation. Fantastic value for money. But that doesn't change my opinion that Canon gave up on the M mount 3 years ago. Sales volume and profit are two totally different things unfortunately. I'd love to see them bring the M mount back, but how anyone can be holding out hope at this point is beyond me.


hope for what though? it's never going to be like a fuji mount where they create professional grade lenses for it. it's a mirrorless rebel system. 

While I would love a 15-50mm F2.8 for it, maybe one day Sigma will put the EOS-M mount on theirs.

While sales and profit are driving factors, so is marketshare and Canon cares a lot about that.

Your post makes it sound like they have discontinued it - they haven't.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 13, 2022)

entoman said:


> If 6 EF-S lenses are still in production, that might indicate the Canon still intends to release (or at least, continue manufacturing) APS-C DSLRs. Even the lowest priced new RF model will likely be at least twice the cost of a budget crop DSLR.
> 
> It's no surprise to me that M lenses continue to be produced, *as the cameras sell extremely well*, especially in Asia.


Not only in asia, bought an M50 when it came to market. Bought two M50 ii to have a RAIC - a redundant array of inexpensive cameras. I live in Europe.
With a bunch of EF(-S) lenses and the phenomenal EF-M 32 they deliver if you are fine with 24 MPix and FullHD. And the sparse number of buttons


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 13, 2022)

Glad that I have bought
- two EF-S 15-85s (bulky but silent AF, IS, great for video with M50) - poor guys CN-E 18-80 substitute
- a 2nd EF-S 60 Macro (insanely sharp, fast and compact on the M50)
- an EF-S 55-250 STM

And yes: I think there is some consolidation of the product portfolio and there will be some tendency to move people to the RF system.
After observing the price of the EF 16-35 f/4 over some months I saw that the price gone up by 300 EUR on Canon's web page and told myself: Buy it, maybe you will miss a 100 EUR rebate action ...
On week later the sellers price increased by 320 EUR!
Maybe it is the way with all products in the lead out of the CO VID era while things are trying to go back to a "normal" state ...


----------



## TMHKR (Feb 13, 2022)

I can't seem to grasp why they discontinue the EF-S 55-250 STM. It's a good lens for many beginners with APS-C bodies


----------



## Maps (Feb 13, 2022)

canonnews said:


> hope for what though? it's never going to be like a fuji mount where they create professional grade lenses for it. it's a mirrorless rebel system.
> 
> While I would love a 15-50mm F2.8 for it, maybe one day Sigma will put the EOS-M mount on theirs.
> 
> ...



For me I think it would simply be hope that Canon acknowledges the existence of the system. Anything... just anything. Say something in a financial report. Make a statement about the future of the mount. Release a roadmap. Announce a lens. Anything. I don't think that's too much to ask for before I invest in something. To me, the silence speaks volumes. I don't know that they ever officially discontinued the Palm Pilot but... it's gone... I feel the same way about the M mount. Hope I'm wrong. I would love to see lower cost, high quality imaging solutions make a comeback (from any manufacturer, not just Canon).


----------



## esglord (Feb 13, 2022)

Where is the 135mm rf replacement?


----------



## Dragon (Feb 13, 2022)

Interesting. What is left in EF is mostly high end (i.e. keep the pros happy until they switch) and a couple of the best ef-s lenses (15-85 and 55-200) have been nixed. That suggests that we will see no more EF bodies and any future ef-s bodies will be very low end. M is a very strong seller, particularly in Asia, so at a minimum, the attitude is wait and see. The upside of these discontinuations is that we may see a faster pace of RF introductions. Anything new in M would be a signal that it stays around at least for a while. My sense is that M has a good chance of survival as there is a likely an ongoing market for a relatively low-priced camera that is versatile and very portable. Nikon has taken the ef-s approach with the Z-50 and only time will tell if that was a smart move. Sony has drastically cut back their APS-c line, but what remains is still small and light. Fuji commands the APS-c high end, but that is a relatively small market. It remains to be seen if Canon makes at least one up-market M and a couple of higher end M lenses to put some heat on Fuji. Otherwise, it looks like an RF world.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2022)

Maps said:


> But that doesn't change my opinion that Canon gave up on the M mount 3 years ago. Sales volume and profit are two totally different things unfortunately. I'd love to see them bring the M mount back, but how anyone can be holding out hope at this point is beyond me.


As a consumer-level product line, the EF-M system is mature. Almost all the typical categories are represented by very lenses. Standard zoom, UWA zoom, telezoom, superzoom, fast(ish) wide and normal primes, and a macro lens. I suppose what’s missing is a fast(ish) portrait prime.

Sales volume and profit are closely related, and for the EF-M lenses the amortized development costs have likely been paid off so they actually generate more profit now.

What would ‘bringing the M mount back’ look like to you?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2022)

TMHKR said:


> I can't seem to grasp why they discontinue the EF-S 55-250 STM. It's a good lens for many beginners with APS-C bodies


It’s part of the very popular double-zoom kit, so it seems unlikely they’ll stop making it. Makes me wonder what being on the ‘old lenses’ list actually means.

For the 55-250, it could mean they will stop selling it standalone, and it will only be available in the kit. I could easily see sales data supporting that decision.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 13, 2022)

Maps said:


> For me I think it would simply be hope that Canon acknowledges the existence of the system. Anything... just anything. Say something in a financial report. Make a statement about the future of the mount. Release a roadmap. Announce a lens. Anything. I don't think that's too much to ask for before I invest in something. To me, the silence speaks volumes. I don't know that they ever officially discontinued the Palm Pilot but... it's gone... I feel the same way about the M mount. Hope I'm wrong. I would love to see lower cost, high quality imaging solutions make a comeback (from any manufacturer, not just Canon).


Canon stated the M50 was the top selling mirrorless camera in the US market (for the year 2020) in 2021, and has made mention of the M50 and EOS-M numerous times in the financials.

Canon is going to focus everything they got on the RF mount, for the time being, we're talking about the survival of the imaging department as a whole is riding on the RF mount. Every technical asset is going to be working 100% on the RF. Not because they want to EOS-M to die, simply because it's a mature system and they can let it ride for a while while they work on RF. This is basically the same thing Sony did.

However, in 2021 Canon stated this to one publication;
_The M series is here to stay. The M series is an important part of our system, the reason being there’s no one camera that’s suitable for everyone, and it’s great to have different cameras at different sizes for different types of usage._


----------



## canonnews (Feb 13, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> It’s part of the very popular double-zoom kit, so it seems unlikely they’ll stop making it.


they could stop making it for individual sales. Looking on amazon japan there are a lot of "1 in stock" "2 in stock" notices with that lens.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 13, 2022)

canonnews said:


> They still have the TS-E17, 24, 50, 90 and 135mm in production.
> 
> it's the older ones that were discontinued.


Thanks, I'm reassured!


----------



## Maps (Feb 13, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sales volume and profit are closely related, and for the EF-M lenses the amortized development costs have likely been paid off so they actually generate more profit now.


I definitely agree with you about the amortized development costs. That's a very valid point. Volume/profit correlation though, I don't buy. I think that's good logic from the 2010s that just doesn't hold up in today's world. Before the iPhone 10 or so, Canon could sell a billion Rebels at low margins and still make pretty good profit. They can't sell M mount cameras in anywhere near that volume anymore. Just look at the financials from a couple years ago when the M mount was outselling everything (as it still is today) but before the R line had really ramped up. Dismal numbers. Selling a few expensive R mount cameras has proven very profitable for them.

As to what I'd like to see... on the body side: keep pushing the AF, keep the codecs coming, better video, I'd take a slight increase in size with the inclusion of IBIS. We saw it in a patent didn't we? To me, the M50's Achilles heel was poor ISO performance + lack of in body stabilization + lack of native stabilized lenses. So I guess on the lens side... if you're not going to put stabilization in the body, at least some quality stabilized zooms? But mostly what I'd have loved to see is... some kind of indication that the system is going to stick around. Some announcements... something... anything. The M50mkII does not fill me with any sense of confidence.

If I said the "R mount is finished" or the "E mount is finished" that would be insane. You can clearly point to development of those systems to disprove that. I don't think it's insane to say that a system that hasn't seen a lens released in... what, 6 years? and a real body in 3 years, or even an announcement of a new product is that far fetched.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 13, 2022)

Just how many lenses in a line does a Canon Rumors member demand Canon produces? 

The M's are just fine folks.


----------



## Maps (Feb 13, 2022)

canonnews said:


> Canon stated the M50 was the top selling mirrorless camera in the US market (for the year 2020) in 2021, and has made mention of the M50 and EOS-M numerous times in the financials.
> 
> Canon is going to focus everything they got on the RF mount, for the time being, we're talking about the survival of the imaging department as a whole is riding on the RF mount. Every technical asset is going to be working 100% on the RF. Not because they want to EOS-M to die, simply because it's a mature system and they can let it ride for a while while they work on RF. This is basically the same thing Sony did.
> 
> ...


I believe you, but the last time I recall them mentioning the m mount in any meaningful way was... I want to say 2019? I kind of remember a quote about the M50 having great sales numbers because it included a bunch of features that punched way above its class... or something to that effect? I think that kind of sums it up nicely... I'd love to see the M mount make a comeback with a camera that "punches way above it's class" in 2022. Or 2023. Or ever.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 13, 2022)

Maps said:


> For what it's worth I have the original M50 and a handful of M mount lenses and I think they're brilliant in the right situation. Fantastic value for money. But that doesn't change my opinion that Canon gave up on the M mount 3 years ago. Sales volume and profit are two totally different things unfortunately. I'd love to see them bring the M mount back, but how anyone can be holding out hope at this point is beyond me.


Although they just released the M6. The M50k II is 3 years old?


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 13, 2022)

esglord said:


> Where is the 135mm rf replacement?


Considering the EF version was released in 1996 and wasn't updated in over 25 years I suspect it wasn't a big seller. Undoubtedly loved by those who owned it if it doesn't make money it isn't going to get any kind of priority.


----------



## Maps (Feb 13, 2022)

jam05 said:


> Although they just released the M6. The M50k II is 3 years old?


I will not acknowledge that firmware update as a "new" camera. I refuse.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2022)

jam05 said:


> The M50k II is 3 years old?


No, its not even half that since it launched in Oct 2020. But some people can only view the world through the lens of their own opinions, and for some people that lens is radically undercorrected and causes severe distortion (of reality).


----------



## David - Sydney (Feb 13, 2022)

Can you link the Petepixel article directly? 
The link in the OP only goes to the wrong article 
(https://petapixel.com/2022/02/11/study-reveals-the-most-complained-about-cameras-in-the-world/) 
and you have to hunt for the specific article.
https://petapixel.com/2022/02/11/canon-has-discontinued-all-but-nine-ef-prime-lenses-report/

Can you also share the Canon Japan discontinued lens list URL?


----------



## AlanF (Feb 13, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> No, its not even half that since it launched in Oct 2020. But some people can only view the world through the lens of their own opinions, and for some people that lens is radically undercorrected and causes severe distortion (of reality).


One of my favourite Einstein quotes is: “Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas; he must burst it open, and that in his youth, and so try to test his ideas on reality.”


----------



## David - Sydney (Feb 13, 2022)

The one strange discontinued lens is the EF 40mm f/2.8 STM. It is the smallest lens in the EF ecosystem and there is no alternative. You would think that the R mount would lend itself to a very small pancake lens as adapting the EF40mm doubles the cost/weight/size.


----------



## David - Sydney (Feb 13, 2022)

The discontinuation of the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM is also strange as it is used as small system when doing macro - especially underwater - as the EF100mm/2.8L and full frame body make it a significantly larger system. 
Of course, you can use either of the EF100mm macro lenses on APS-c bodies if you wish.


----------



## Pixel (Feb 13, 2022)

I wish I could remember who it was that implied I was an idiot for proclaiming that the EF mount is dead?


----------



## David - Sydney (Feb 13, 2022)

The list of currently available EF-s lenses on the Canon Japan website are:
EF-S10-18mm F4.5-5.6 IS STM
EF-S10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM => still on available Canon Japan list but listed in the "Recently Discontinued EF Lenses" Canon Rumors site
EF-S17-55mm F2.8 IS USM => still on available Canon Japan list but listed in the "Recently Discontinued EF Lenses" Canon Rumors site
EF-S18-55mm F4-5.6 IS STM
EF-S18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM
EF-S24mm F2.8 STM

I think that it is clear that the only EF-s lenses left are the wide angle ones. This would support the idea that they would be used (adapted) to cover the wide angle requirement of a R mount APS-c body


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I think that it is clear that the only EF-s lenses left are the wide angle ones. This would support the idea that they would be used (adapted) to cover the wide angle requirement of a R mount APS-c body


It also supports the idea that those are the additional lenses most people (of the relatively few who go beyond the kit lenses) actually buy. The two-lens kits outsell the single-lens version, at least domestically. Since that provides a standard and a telephoto zoom, it makes sense people would expand to a wider angle zoom, a faster lens (the EF 50/1.8 is very popular), or buy a lens with a broader zoom range than the kit lenses.


----------



## David - Sydney (Feb 13, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> It also supports the idea that those are the additional lenses most people (of the relatively few who go beyond the kit lenses) actually buy. The two-lens kits outsell the single-lens version, at least domestically. Since that provides a standard and a telephoto zoom, it makes sense people would expand to a wider angle zoom.


Agreed.
The EF-s 10-22mm was the first EF-s lens that I purchased (second hand) for my first DLSR. I only had the EF24-105mm/4L prior to that.
If they want longer lenses then the EF range makes more sense.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 13, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Agreed.
> The EF-s 10-22mm was the first EF-s lens that I purchased (second hand) for my first DLSR. I only had the EF24-105mm/4L prior to that.
> If they want longer lenses then the EF range makes more sense.


I skipped the kit lenses with my first DSLR (a T1i/500D). Instead, I bought the EF-S 17-55/2.8 and the EF 85/1.8. My 3rd lens was the EF-S 10-22.


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 14, 2022)

Wowee.


----------



## sanj (Feb 14, 2022)

Soon: Canon discontinues DSLR's.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 14, 2022)

sanj said:


> Soon: Canon discontinues DSLR's.


DSLRs comprise 40% of ILC sales. Canon holds the majority of that. Remember when the consumer DSLR would be dead in 5 years? I think that was 2013. 

Soon is relative.


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 14, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> DSLRs comprise 40% of ILC sales. Canon holds the majority of that. Remember when the consumer DSLR would be dead in 5 years? I think that was 2013.
> 
> Soon is relative.


Canon could discontinue DSLRs and bring back film SLR's on EF mount so that optical purists can continue to have their mode of expression.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 14, 2022)

A LOT of moaning about the M line here, what's the % of owners vs well, just moaners?
It's a lower level, non professional line, why all the emotion as if it should be full like EF?
Folks just like to moan, even though I occasionally put CR in an elevated status, it's the still just the internet I have to remind myself. We should be better than that.


----------



## tapanit (Feb 14, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> The one strange discontinued lens is the EF 40mm f/2.8 STM. It is the smallest lens in the EF ecosystem and there is no alternative. You would think that the R mount would lend itself to a very small pancake lens as adapting the EF40mm doubles the cost/weight/size.


Indeed, the RF 50/1.8 is smaller than the EF40 + adapter. Actually it's not all that much bigger than the EF40 *without* the adapter, so perhaps Canon considers it a reasonable alternative.

But the difference between 40mm and 50mm is significant, and I'd love to see a really small RF40 pancake lens.


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 14, 2022)

privatebydesign said:


> Considering the EF version was released in 1996 and wasn't updated in over 25 years I suspect it wasn't a big seller. Undoubtedly loved by those who owned it if it doesn't make money it isn't going to get any kind of priority.


I doubt any of the prime lenses was a big seller in the past decade. The EF 135mm f/2 has excellent IQ, possibly Canon thought it didn't need an update. My bet is its a low priority due to being small enough for owners not to complain about using it with an adapter.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 14, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Agreed.
> The EF-s 10-22mm was the first EF-s lens that I purchased (second hand) for my first DLSR. I only had the EF24-105mm/4L prior to that.
> If they want longer lenses then the EF range makes more sense.


The 10–22mm was the only EF-S lens that I bought for my Rebel beyond the kit lens that came with it. I got excellent results with it. It was the last lens with which I actually made some money, shooting interiors for a realtor. Otherwise, I got EF lenses, which of course I can still use today. I didn’t necessarily intend to go to full-frame when I bought them. They were just the right choice for what I wanted.


----------



## Bahrd (Feb 14, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> But some people can only view the world through the lens of their own opinions, and for some people that lens is radically undercorrected and causes severe distortion (of reality).


Yup, the TS-E people seem the things are straight even if they are not so... 


David - Sydney said:


> The one strange discontinued lens is the EF 40mm f/2.8 STM. It is the smallest lens in the EF ecosystem and there is no alternative. You would think that the R mount would lend itself to a very small pancake lens as adapting the EF40mm doubles the cost/weight/size.


I hope so. Had M50 had an USB charger I would have replaced [email protected] with [email protected]


Blue Zurich said:


> A LOT of moaning about the M line here, what's the % of owners vs well, just moaners?


Most of M users don't care about opinions at a niche forum (and we shouldn't either .


----------



## mxwphoto (Feb 14, 2022)

tapanit said:


> Indeed, the RF 50/1.8 is smaller than the EF40 + adapter. Actually it's not all that much bigger than the EF40 *without* the adapter, so perhaps Canon considers it a reasonable alternative.
> 
> But the difference between 40mm and 50mm is significant, and I'd love to see a really small RF40 pancake lens.


I never understood the use of a tiny pancake lens on a big DSLR camera. If one wants to travel light and incognito ala for street photos, turning to 22mm on a M6ii would be much more ideal.


----------



## koenkooi (Feb 14, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> I never understood the use of a tiny pancake lens on a big DSLR camera. If one wants to travel light and incognito ala for street photos, turning to 22mm on a M6ii would be much more ideal.


The 22mm + original M could fit in my jeans front pocket. They sadly stopped producing both the M and the jeans with those size pockets


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Feb 14, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> I never understood the use of a tiny pancake lens on a big DSLR camera. If one wants to travel light and incognito ala for street photos, turning to 22mm on a M6ii would be much more ideal.


There was a time (late 2012) when 6D+40mm was, by a large margin, the best option to have a reasonably sized FF DSLR combo with all the last techs available (in fact, the smallest and lightest at the time of 40mm launch). At that time, M system was far from being the success it became about 5-6 years later, and far from giving the results that gave even M5 and M6, for instance. Whatsoever, 6D is still better and more reliable for intensive usage and overall image quality than an EOS M50 of 2018. 
Though, by now, I agree the 40mm may be much less interesting... and that's probably one of the reason why Canon has stopped producing it, some other reasons being probably :

the fact Canon is leaving EF mount production (something that was announced back in 2020, I think) 
the fact that there are so many 40mms that were sold and are probably still working fine, 
the second hand market is just enough to find one + not enough people are interested in buying one new. 
Only around my city, there is always 2 or 3 40mms to sell at a reasonable price since at least 2020 (including mine ).
Anyway, to add a very personal point of view, my own replacement for the 6D+40mm combo would never be M6II+22mm pancake (even if it's a pretty good one for its usage). It would be Nikon Z6+40mm F/2 which btw is even better than 6D+40 was... (at least to my sense, just hoping it will be as durable).


----------



## 2 cents (Feb 14, 2022)

I'm a full time professional photographer. Canon's apparent abandonment of the EF mount is in my view premature.
I always been an early adopter, and was one of the first to jump on the EF system from the FD mount over 3 decades ago.

Problem is that for my work, mirrorless is not ready yet. My workhorse is the 5D Mk4. I have the R5 and hate it. Cannot stand it. It is too small, it eats batteries like chocolate cake and it simply doesn't give me any advantages over the 5D Mk4 in my line of work. The R5 will be a great travel camera though.

Lenses are also lacking. I much much prefer the 100EF macro over the RF100 macro. Again it has features that are superfluous for my needs, while making it unnecessarily heavy, and expensive, while distance between front lens and subject as close focus distance is worse on the new lens.

I just bought the RF 14-35mm L. It has shocking barrel distortion. I read that DPP will correct this, but DPP will not install on MacOS for a reason, and is a common issue I found out.


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Feb 14, 2022)

2 cents said:


> I'm a full time professional photographer. Canon's apparent abandonment of the EF mount is in my view premature.
> I always been an early adopter, and was one of the first to jump on the EF system from the FD mount over 3 decades ago.
> 
> Problem is that for my work, mirrorless is not ready yet. My workhorse is the 5D Mk4. I have the R5 and hate it. Cannot stand it. It is too small, it eats batteries like chocolate cake and it simply doesn't give me any advantages over the 5D Mk4 in my line of work. The R5 will be a great travel camera though.
> ...


Valid points, I think there are still many photographers that are simply using still great overall techs of at least five years ago (computer techs included). With the launch of many techs that forced obsolescence, Apple, with the cycle they've been thru these last years, gives only two real years of valid support to their OS, each version being mature only 1 year after launch and being considered obsolete for support after only 3 years.


----------



## PerKr (Feb 14, 2022)

Just before the new year, a canon executive confirmed that the 1Dx mkIII was the last carnon DSLR. That means no more EF mount bodies will be developed. There is no point in keeping the cheaper penta-mirror line. They will produce, and sell, these items as long as they make money off them but they will be gone. And they will be replaced with RF counterparts, if they are replaced at all; people are not as interested in ILC's now as they were 10 years ago.


----------



## HMC11 (Feb 14, 2022)

2 cents said:


> I'm a full time professional photographer. Canon's apparent abandonment of the EF mount is in my view premature.
> I always been an early adopter, and was one of the first to jump on the EF system from the FD mount over 3 decades ago.
> 
> Problem is that for my work, mirrorless is not ready yet. My workhorse is the 5D Mk4. I have the R5 and hate it. Cannot stand it. It is too small, it eats batteries like chocolate cake and it simply doesn't give me any advantages over the 5D Mk4 in my line of work. The R5 will be a great travel camera though.
> ...


Agree. I think the EF system is still very useable, and in cases like yours, is actually preferred. However, Canon is most likely making a business decision to stop the EF (eventually) and focus on the RF. As for the EF-M, my wish is for an M5markII on a similar level as the M6markII. That does not seem to be happening, and again it is probably a profit/margin decision. Given that there are new third party M lenses (eg. Sigma in 2020, Samyang etc), it seems that M mount may yet have some years of life left, unless the R mount can match the size and weight of the M mount camera (and lenses).

Can you share your experience with the RF 14-35? I just got mine and am pretty happy with it thus far in terms of sharpness, colour and rendering, psychologically treating it essentially as a 16-35mm lens, with the bonus of 14-15mm that are still very good but need heavy corrections.


----------



## sanj (Feb 14, 2022)

PerKr said:


> Just before the new year, a canon executive confirmed that the 1Dx mkIII was the last carnon DSLR. That means no more EF mount bodies will be developed. There is no point in keeping the cheaper penta-mirror line. They will produce, and sell, these items as long as they make money off them but they will be gone. And they will be replaced with RF counterparts, if they are replaced at all; people are not as interested in ILC's now as they were 10 years ago.


Agree. Obvious this is.


----------



## hollybush (Feb 14, 2022)

PerKr said:


> Just before the new year, a canon executive confirmed that the 1Dx mkIII was the last carnon DSLR.



What was actually said in the original Japanese was that it was the last 1-series DSLR. And I think it only became the Mk III because the Mk II used an orphaned memory card standard.

Nothing was said about the more mainstream 5-series either way. Reading the tea leaves, I would not be surprised if the Mk IV was the last, but nothing was _said_.

The modern 1-series is far more appropriate to be replaced by mirrorless because of the kind of action photography it is mostly used for.


----------



## TMHKR (Feb 14, 2022)

PerKr said:


> Just before the new year, a canon executive confirmed that the 1Dx mkIII was the last carnon DSLR.


Wrong, they confirmed it will be their last DSLR in the 1D line, not the last DSLR in general.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 14, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> Can you link the Petepixel article directly?
> The link in the OP only goes to the wrong article
> (https://petapixel.com/2022/02/11/study-reveals-the-most-complained-about-cameras-in-the-world/)
> and you have to hunt for the specific article.
> ...


whoops!
thanks for the catch. that was an article i was going to write up, clipboard caught up to me.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 14, 2022)

PerKr said:


> Just before the new year, a canon executive confirmed that the 1Dx mkIII was the last carnon DSLR.


No they didn't. They just stated that the 1DX Mark III would be the last 1 series DLSR.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 14, 2022)

PerKr said:


> Just before the new year, a canon executive confirmed that the 1Dx mkIII was the last carnon DSLR.


it’s usually best to read more than just the title of an article. If you fail to do that, you often end up looking rather foolish.



sanj said:


> Agree. Obvious this is.


Of course, when you make a foolish and factually incorrect statement, some people will agree with you quite readily.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 14, 2022)

PerKr said:


> Just before the new year, a canon executive confirmed that the 1Dx mkIII was the last carnon DSLR. That means no more EF mount bodies will be developed. There is no point in keeping the cheaper penta-mirror line. They will produce, and sell, these items as long as they make money off them but they will be gone. And they will be replaced with RF counterparts, if they are replaced at all; people are not as interested in ILC's now as they were 10 years ago.


This is false. it was stated it would be the end of the 1D line....oh look, I'm not the first to jump all over that 'only read the headline' mess.


----------



## entoman (Feb 14, 2022)

hollybush said:


> What was actually said in the original Japanese was that it was the last 1-series DSLR. And I think it only became the Mk III because the Mk II used an orphaned memory card standard.
> 
> Nothing was said about the more mainstream 5-series either way. Reading the tea leaves, I would not be surprised if the Mk IV was the last, but nothing was _said_.
> 
> The modern 1-series is far more appropriate to be replaced by mirrorless because of the kind of action photography it is mostly used for.


My opinion:

M series is here to stay for at least 2-3 years. Possibly a new body will come, but it'll be an incremental upgrade rather than anything radical.

Budget APS-C (Rebel) DSLRs will also stay for at least 3 years, as they are much cheaper to produce than RF models, and will feed economy buyers into the Canon system. Most likely there will be a new model, but again, nothing radical.

Mid-range DSLRs such as 90D and 5DMkiv are probably still in production as there is still enough demand, but they'll probably be phased out in the next couple of years.

1Dxiii will continue to be made until demand for it disappears. Canon's claim that the 1Dxiii is still the current flagship is designed purely to calm recent buyers who might be upset that the R3 is better and cheaper. The R3 is hugely superior in almost every regard, it's the top model in the Canon range, and therefore it's the current flagship. It will considerably outsell the Nikon Z9 and the Sony A1, despite them being arguably better specified.

The "R1" is at least a year away.

Next RF camera will be the "R7" which will probably be a mirrorless 90D, with animal-eye AF and 20fps.


----------



## Bonich (Feb 14, 2022)

Antono Refa said:


> Canon no longer manufactures the TS-E lenses, though some are new (5yo), and only two are even rumored to be replaced?
> 
> I can see Canon reusing the optical formula with new body & electronics, but I'd expect a rumor saying Canon is going to release the whole bunch in TS-R.


Please use the link and look up the list:
- all TS-E still in production
- MP-E still in production
- 100mm IS Macro still in production


----------



## Bonich (Feb 14, 2022)

esglord said:


> Where is the 135mm rf replacement?


Zeiss Milvus


----------



## unfocused (Feb 14, 2022)

Since I’ve now sold my DSLRs and never owned an M this doesn’t really affect me, but I am interested in future RF lenses and I suspect that if a lens has been dropped from the EF or EF-s systems one should not hold out a lot of hope that it will appear in future RF lens roadmaps.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 14, 2022)

canonnews said:


> They still have the TS-E17, 24, 50, 90 and 135mm in production.
> 
> it's the older ones that were discontinued.


Not according to this BS list of all but nine lenses being discontinued


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 14, 2022)

canonnews said:


> according to Japan: https://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/
> 
> I'll put that in the article though.


The entire list of every officially discontinued lens is right there.
There is no need for any speculation:




__





キヤノン：一眼レフカメラ／ミラーレスカメラ用交換レンズ｜EF LENS　生産終了した商品情報


一眼レフ用交換レンズの販売終了した旧製品の一覧です。機種仕様と対応オプション品についてご確認いただけます。




cweb.canon.jp


----------



## canonnews (Feb 14, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Not according to this BS list of all but nine lenses being discontinued



Those TS-E's mentioned are certainly not discontinued. and there are more than 9 lenses available. there are 12 EF Zooms, 9 primes, 1 macro, 5 TS-E's, 6 EF-S, and 7 EF-M's.



> The entire list of every officially discontinued lens is right there.
> There is no need for any speculation:



That was kind of the gist of the article my friend.


----------



## Pixel (Feb 14, 2022)

2 cents said:


> I'm a full time professional photographer. Canon's apparent abandonment of the EF mount is in my view premature.
> I always been an early adopter, and was one of the first to jump on the EF system from the FD mount over 3 decades ago.
> 
> Problem is that for my work, mirrorless is not ready yet. My workhorse is the 5D Mk4. I have the R5 and hate it. Cannot stand it. It is too small, it eats batteries like chocolate cake and it simply doesn't give me any advantages over the 5D Mk4 in my line of work. The R5 will be a great travel camera though.
> ...


What Mac OS are you on? DPP works just fine on my Mac and my computer is as new as you can get. 
To say "lenses are lacking" is a bit premature. The EF line had decades to build up, it'll get there. The EF to RF adaptor, that offers native adaption, is a fine solution. 
Can you say what type of photography you do and how the R5 specifically doesn't work for your application?


----------



## melgross (Feb 14, 2022)

canonnews said:


> hope for what though? it's never going to be like a fuji mount where they create professional grade lenses for it. it's a mirrorless rebel system.
> 
> While I would love a 15-50mm F2.8 for it, maybe one day Sigma will put the EOS-M mount on theirs.
> 
> ...


I don’t understand what’s wrong with it not being a “professional“ system. Does everything have to be upgradable to professional? It’s done very well in the markets it’s been in. That’s despite the lack of “pro” level lenses. While I don’t have one, I know a couple of people who do, and they’re very happy with them. Sure, I suppose three, or so, more lenses would have been nice, but most people with these aren’t really interested.

I think it would be a shame if Canon discontinued them.


----------



## danfaz (Feb 14, 2022)

privatebydesign said:


> Considering the EF version was released in 1996 and wasn't updated in over 25 years I suspect it wasn't a big seller. Undoubtedly loved by those who owned it if it doesn't make money it isn't going to get any kind of priority.


It wasn't updated because there was really no need to. There was no Mark II EF 50 1.2 either, but now we have an updated RF version. A 135 f/1.4 is on the RF lens roadmap.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 14, 2022)

danfaz said:


> It wasn't updated because there was really no need to. There was no Mark II EF 50 1.2 either, but now we have an updated RF version. A 135 f/1.4 is on the RF lens roadmap.


Need and money making rarely go hand in hand. If the 135 f2 had been a big seller there is every reason to think there would have been iterations just as there were with the superteles, the 2.8 zooms, the 85 f1.2, the 35 f1.4, the TS-E's, etc etc.


----------



## AJ (Feb 14, 2022)

2 cents said:


> Canon's apparent abandonment of the EF mount is in my view premature.



I wonder if the gobal chip shortage forced Canon's hand. I wonder if, with limited resources, they decided to can EF and put their efforts towards RF. RF lenses have been in short supply, showing the demand is there for more production. The RF lenses are more expensive and I would think profit margins are higher. To me, in this context, canning EF seems like a sensible move on Canon's part. 
Now, will we see RF lens shortages alleviated because of this?


----------



## SilverBox (Feb 14, 2022)

The end is nigh! R3pent!


----------



## entoman (Feb 14, 2022)

2 cents said:


> I'm a full time professional photographer. Canon's apparent abandonment of the EF mount is in my view premature.
> I always been an early adopter, and was one of the first to jump on the EF system from the FD mount over 3 decades ago.
> 
> Problem is that for my work, mirrorless is not ready yet. My workhorse is the 5D Mk4. I have the R5 and hate it. Cannot stand it. It is too small, it eats batteries like chocolate cake and it simply doesn't give me any advantages over the 5D Mk4 in my line of work. The R5 will be a great travel camera though.
> ...


I have 5DMkiv and R5. Nowadays my photography is purely for my own pleasure, but I'm often shooting in tough environments, and many of my photographs are unrepeatable. There's no second chance, so above all I need dependability. Yes, the R5 freezes occasionally and chews batteries, but otherwise is fine, and offers me advantages in certain situations. I keep the 5DMkiv because I know that it's utterly dependable, and I can absolutely understand anyone who prefers DSLRs and doesn't want the expense (and the learning curve) of switching to mirrorless.

I also agree about the 100mm macros - the EF version is more than sharp enough for the R5 sensor, and I rarely need to go closer than 1:2. The aspherical aberration control on the RF version may be of value to portrait or wedding photographers, but it's wasted on me.

But although I will continue to buy certain EF lenses that I prefer over the RF versions, I'm not at all bothered about what you call their "premature" abandonment. Sure, quite a few of the lenses have been discontinued, but there are tens of thousands of them available in pristine condition on the secondhand market. I bought my TS-E 24mm and my 180mm macro secondhand, and any others that I want will be available secondhand for many years to come. Why buy new, when there are so many mint secondhand lenses available?


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 14, 2022)

Lens mount changes in the camera world historically have never been as smooth and consumer friendly as the switch from EF to RF. Who else makes a compatible 1st party mount when launching a new line? The ease at which we have been able to quickly or slowly or ease into the RF system has been phenomenal. Furthermore, no one is forcing anyone to switch, adapt or change anything. People just like to bitch, let's be honest about that. It's the entire premise of the web.


----------



## entoman (Feb 14, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> The discontinuation of the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM is also strange as it is used as small system when doing macro - especially underwater - as the EF100mm/2.8L and full frame body make it a significantly larger system.
> Of course, you can use either of the EF100mm macro lenses on APS-c bodies if you wish.


The EF-S 60mm macro was a superb optic, and very compact.

I personally know about 40 macro photographers, all of who shoot on APS-C, and all of them use 90, 100, 105 or 180mm lenses. That's only a small sample of course, but I'd guess that most macro photographers prefer a longer working distance. Why? Because small living subjects may be nervous and difficult to approach. And static subjects in the studio can be difficult to illuminate, without casting a shadow over them.

What I'm leading to, is that there is a lot of demand for longer focal lengths, but probably far less demand for a 60mm, and I think that's the simple explanation of why the lens is no longer produced. Another reason for its relative lack of popularity, is that it can't be used on FF bodies, and many APS-C users may be pondering whether to "upgrade" to FF.


----------



## Skux (Feb 14, 2022)

How is the 85mm f1.8 still in production lol


----------



## canonnews (Feb 14, 2022)

2 cents said:


> I'm a full time professional photographer. Canon's apparent abandonment of the EF mount is in my view premature.


I talked a bit about this in the article. I personally don't feel it's just them wanting to toast the EF lens catalog but there are no factors in play.


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 14, 2022)

canonnews said:


> Canon stated the M50 was the top selling mirrorless camera in the US market (for the year 2020) in 2021, and has made mention of the M50 and EOS-M numerous times in the financials.
> 
> Canon is going to focus everything they got on the RF mount, for the time being, we're talking about the survival of the imaging department as a whole is riding on the RF mount. Every technical asset is going to be working 100% on the RF. Not because they want to EOS-M to die, simply because it's a mature system and they can let it ride for a while while they work on RF. This is basically the same thing Sony did.
> 
> ...


Agree that Canon will be focusing 100% on RF mount for the foreseeable future. But how long before neglect becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy on the fate of the M mount? I'd also disagree with the people that call the M mount a mature system. I think that even in its limited scope it is missing some pieces and at the very least some updates.

And Sony has been saying pretty much the same words on the A mount for a few years and we all know what has happened with that. Not saying that Canon and Sony behave the same way, but I personally wouldn't put much stock in this type of no-commitment announcements. I am sure they want to protect the sales of M cameras and lenses as long as possible without any actual investment in the mount.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 14, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> I am sure they want to protect the sales of M cameras and lenses as long as possible without any actual investment in the mount.


The M50 II came out after the R5 and R6.


----------



## joseph ferraro (Feb 14, 2022)

entoman said:


> The EF-S 60mm macro was a superb optic, and very compact.
> 
> I personally know about 40 macro photographers, all of who shoot on APS-C, and all of them use 90, 100, 105 or 180mm lenses. That's only a small sample of course, but I'd guess that most macro photographers prefer a longer working distance. Why? Because small living subjects may be nervous and difficult to approach. And static subjects in the studio can be difficult to illuminate, without casting a shadow over them.
> 
> What I'm leading to, is that there is a lot of demand for longer focal lengths, but probably far less demand for a 60mm, and I think that's the simple explanation of why the lens is no longer produced. Another reason for its relative lack of popularity, is that it can't be used on FF bodies, and many APS-C users may be pondering whether to "upgrade" to FF.


Macro photographer (live insitu) here that uses the mpe-65 on FF m4 and now a r5 for about 90-95% of my field work since with the subjects I photograph I need 2-4x, and I am an odd one that loves a close working distance since it allows my diffusion setup to be compact. 

Looking at the discontinued lenses, I have only been afraid of Canon discontinuing that lens since it pairs so beautifully with the mt24/26ex flashes. I admit that this only pertains to a small percentage of photographers using a setup like mine in the macro world. I can say though, the mpe65 paired with the r5, once I got used to the evf, is a dream in the field. The only lockups I have experienced on the r5 so far with with a kenko 1.4x tc with my sigma 70-200 lens. It hated that combo. take the tc off and it was happy as can be, but I don't shoot that much with that lens on the r5 since I can use the tc and the sigma on my m4 with no problem.

would I love a 180mm 1:1 macro lens for the rf mount line, yes, yes I would as well. for now I use my sigma 180 macro on the m4 or adapted to the r5.


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 14, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The M50 II came out after the R5 and R6.


True, although we don't know when the plan to update the M50 to the M50 mkII actually started, and, in terms of investment in the M system, the last real investments imho have been in 2019 (M6 mkII and M200) and 2018 (32mm and etc.)

To be clear, I do not wish the M mount to wither away, but I do think that it will, in fact, decline, regardless of our or Canon's wishes, unless Canon does something material about that, and I also think that the likelihood of Canon doing something material about that is low.


----------



## esglord (Feb 14, 2022)

Bonich said:


> Zeiss Milvus


fair enough, just to be clear, I'm not saying there are no good alternatives. It just seems odd that they would discontinue a good, albeit old, lens design without a replacement coming imminently. If it weren't profitable enough, they could have maybe just raised the price, but to the other poster's point, maybe the market for it is simply non-existent. At this point, I'm sitting back and waiting to see what canon and third-parties come out with for the rf mount the next year or so before buying any more lenses. More good stuff coming, I hope


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 14, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> True, although we don't know when the plan to update the M50 to the M50 mkII actually started, and, in terms of investment in the M system, the last real investments imho have been in 2019 (M6 mkII and M200) and 2018 (32mm and etc.)


The M50 came out around the time the EOS R launched. Given past comments from Canon, that probably means planning for the successor started before that and development work started soon after. So, essentially in parallel with the R5/R6.

I don’t understand how releasing two cameras in a year constitutes ‘a real investment’ and releasing one camera in a year does not. Does that mean that since only one R series camera came out in 2021, Canon did not really invest in the system? Of course not.



roby17269 said:


> To be clear, I do not wish the M mount to wither away, but I do think that it will, in fact, decline, regardless of our or Canon's wishes, unless Canon does something material about that, and I also think that the likelihood of Canon doing something material about that is low.


Are you aware that in most months, the M50 (original) is among the top 10 best-selling ILCs in Japan? The M50 II is always there, but the M50 continues to sell very well.

As posted by one of our new hosts earlier in this thread, Canon explicitly stated, “_The M series is here to stay._“ That certainly doesn’t sound at all like the picture you are painting, and I will go out on a limb here and suggest that Canon knows more about their future strategy than you (it was a very thick limb).


----------



## canonnews (Feb 14, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> Agree that Canon will be focusing 100% on RF mount for the foreseeable future. But how long before neglect becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy on the fate of the M mount?


A few years ago I wrote an article that as rumor sites go, we have a responsibility not to create scenarios such as what you are describing.

But the same can be said about any mount or any camera system. No matter the company.



roby17269 said:


> I'd also disagree with the people that call the M mount a mature system. I think that even in its limited scope it is missing some pieces and at the very least some updates.


It's a mature system for its intended market. The highest level it is supposed to get even as far as Canon's literature is sitting around the 90D level.
Does it? The M6 Mark II is a great little camera, and until the R5 and R6 came out was Canon's highest performing mirrorless camera. The pieces that you suggest are missing are more prosumer than Canon wants to make of this camera.



roby17269 said:


> And Sony has been saying pretty much the same words on the A mount for a few years and we all know what has happened with that. Not saying that Canon and Sony behave the same way, but I personally wouldn't put much stock in this type of no-commitment announcements. I am sure they want to protect the sales of M cameras and lenses as long as possible without any actual investment in the mount.


Sony's last A mount camera was 2016, their last A mount lens was 2015. This isn't what we are talking about here.

Canon doesn't protect sales. that's a internet myth. Canon will happily sell you any camera they sell, as long as you purchase Canon. They have made this clear over the years. They know that some markets, EOS-M sells well, in some markets, it doesn't. When you dominate the camera market, you make sure you can sell cameras into any market available.


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 14, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The M50 came out around the time the EOS R launched. Given past comments from Canon, that probably means planning for the successor started before that and development work started soon after. So, essentially in parallel with the R5/R6.


Fair enough


neuroanatomist said:


> I don’t understand how releasing two cameras in a year constitutes ‘a real investment’ and releasing one camera in a year does not. Does that mean that since only one R series camera came out in 2021, Canon did not really invest in the system? Of course not.


Simply because the M50 mkII was a very light refresh, most of it software rather than hardware. I would not think that the M50 mkII warranted anywhere near the same investment than the one required by the R3, nor that the M50 mkII is as significant as the R3 for their respective mounts. And I do not believe anyone here is doubting Canon's commitment to the RF mount.


neuroanatomist said:


> Are you aware that in most months, the M50 (original) is among the top 10 best-selling ILCs in Japan? The M50 II is always there, but the M50 continues to sell very well.


Sure that gets repeated many times. Also Olympus users repeated the same mantra. I am not disputing that particular fact, I just don't think it should be taken as definitive proof of the future viability of the M mount.


neuroanatomist said:


> As posted by one of our new hosts earlier in this thread, Canon explicitly stated, “_The M series is here to stay._“ That certainly doesn’t sound at all like the picture you are painting, and I will go out on a limb here and suggest that Canon knows more about their future strategy than you (it was a very thick limb).


Well, I'd argue Canon knows more about their future strategies than all of us here put together, our host included. We are just speculating, all of us. 
I happen to be quite jaded about that type of announcements, given recent events with other companies (Sony about the A mount). 

Look, you may very well be right about me being pessimistic about the M mount. And, while I am not target market for it, I'd be happy for it to keep on being developed, although they'd have a much bigger chance to sell me a crop camera if it was RF. I already have 2 incompatible systems (not counting the GoPro  ) and I wouldn't want a 3rd one. I just think that it is unlikely that Canon will develop the M mount any further, especially if they will introduce RF crop cameras.


----------



## melgross (Feb 14, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> The M50 came out around the time the EOS R launched. Given past comments from Canon, that probably means planning for the successor started before that and development work started soon after. So, essentially in parallel with the R5/R6.
> 
> I don’t understand how releasing two cameras in a year constitutes ‘a real investment’ and releasing one camera in a year does not. Does that mean that since only one R series camera came out in 2021, Canon did not really invest in the system? Of course not.
> 
> ...


Agreed. After all, Canon has the sales numbers of everywhere their products are sold. They also know the break even point of production, and they have estimates as to where sales are going depending on any number of factors. They certainly take mirrorless into account and see how lens sales are doing there, as well as bodies. They have their own economists doing the evaluations.


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 14, 2022)

canonnews said:


> A few years ago I wrote an article that as rumor sites go, we have a responsibility not to create scenarios such as what you are describing.
> 
> But the same can be said about any mount or any camera system. No matter the company.


True


canonnews said:


> It's a mature system for its intended market. The highest level it is supposed to get even as far as Canon's literature is sitting around the 90D level.
> Does it? The M6 Mark II is a great little camera, and until the R5 and R6 came out was Canon's highest performing mirrorless camera. The pieces that you suggest are missing are more prosumer than Canon wants to make of this camera.


Maybe - I'd argue though that prosumers are becoming a much more important market than they were years ago


canonnews said:


> Sony's last A mount camera was 2016, their last A mount lens was 2015. This isn't what we are talking about here.


My point was that Sony released similarly worded messages but, in the end, the A mount died regardless of all the vocal support.
They wrote this: 
_"Having options is really important, especially for high-end amateurs and professionals. If we just had the same cameras and lenses [as our competitors] the results would be the same. Some people want A-mount, some want E-mount, and depending on the situation, some customers might want both. Having that variety of bodies and lenses is key.
We need both A mount and E mount. Some people thought that Sony was only developing the E mount, until we introduced the a99 II. You’ve seen it, it’s a serious camera. There is a huge number of lenses for A mount, from Sony and Minolta, and we want to maintain a good relationship with those customers by providing great A mount bodies with no compromises compared to the E mount system. But we can start capturing new customers with the E mount. We need both."_
But the only thing they introduced after that were adaptors to mount A lenses on E cameras.


canonnews said:


> Canon doesn't protect sales. that's a internet myth. Canon will happily sell you any camera they sell, as long as you purchase Canon. They have made this clear over the years. They know that some markets, EOS-M sells well, in some markets, it doesn't. When you dominate the camera market, you make sure you can sell cameras into any market available.


I am sure Canon prefers to sell more RF cameras than DSLR or M cameras.


----------



## David - Sydney (Feb 14, 2022)

entoman said:


> The EF-S 60mm macro was a superb optic, and very compact.
> 
> I personally know about 40 macro photographers, all of who shoot on APS-C, and all of them use 90, 100, 105 or 180mm lenses. That's only a small sample of course, but I'd guess that most macro photographers prefer a longer working distance. Why? Because small living subjects may be nervous and difficult to approach. And static subjects in the studio can be difficult to illuminate, without casting a shadow over them.
> 
> What I'm leading to, is that there is a lot of demand for longer focal lengths, but probably far less demand for a 60mm, and I think that's the simple explanation of why the lens is no longer produced. Another reason for its relative lack of popularity, is that it can't be used on FF bodies, and many APS-C users may be pondering whether to "upgrade" to FF.


Yes, working distance is a key advantage for in the field macro although ring lights should minimise any flash shadowing at closer distances. 
I'm not saying that the EF-S 60mm macro was a big seller but it is fairly unique in being a very small/light macro combination. Getting my R5/100mm macro setup close to subjects underwater is like driving a bus given its size. Using point/shoot TG series or Canon G series can be easier to get good macro shots given the very small sensor and "macro" mode.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 15, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> I am sure Canon prefers to sell more RF cameras than DSLR or M cameras.


No doubt the margins are higher. But for now, unit sales of M and DSLR bodies are much higher. Until there are RF bodies in the price range of entry level M’s and DSLRs, that’s not likely to change.


----------



## sanj (Feb 15, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> DSLRs comprise 40% of ILC sales. Canon holds the majority of that. Remember when the consumer DSLR would be dead in 5 years? I think that was 2013.
> 
> Soon is relative.


Impending


neuroanatomist said:


> No doubt the margins are higher. But for now, unit sales of M and DSLR bodies are much higher. *Until there are RF bodies in the price range of entry level M’s and DSLRs, that’s not likely to change.*


Standby


----------



## sanj (Feb 15, 2022)

It takes a special kind of intelligence to not see that if EF lenses are being discontinued, DSLR will soon follow.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 15, 2022)

sanj said:


> It takes a special kind of intelligence to not see that if EF lenses are being discontinued, DSLR will soon follow.


Yes, Canon has reduced their current list of EF lenses to 27. That's one more than the 26 RF lenses currently in production. It takes a special kind of intelligence to think that 27 lenses aren't enough for a system, but 26 lenses are. In fact, the EOS M system is aimed at consumers, remains extremely popular, and has only 7 lenses. Since most of the current DSLR sales are in the price range of the EOS M system (i.e. entry-level APS-C), 27 EF and 6 EF-S lenses are actually overkill for the current state of APS-C DSLRs. Canon can keep on discontinuing EF lenses, and release new entry-level DSLRs. This isn't difficult for most people to understand.

It also takes a special kind of intelligence to think that Canon will imminently walk away from 40% of the ILC market. Fortunately for Canon's shareholders, Canon is smarter than that.


----------



## Jethro (Feb 15, 2022)

sanj said:


> It takes a special kind of intelligence to not see that if EF lenses are being discontinued, DSLR will soon follow.


_Some_ EF (and EF-S) lenses are being discontinued. Not all of them. And there is no indication at all that blanket discontinuance of DSLRs (or M series bodies) will happen 'soon'. As a matter of interest, what does 'soon' actually mean to you? This year? Within 3 years? 5 years? 10? 

As keeps being said here interminably, until there are low / entry level-priced RF bodies on the market, and they are being popularly taken up (in preference to M-series and entry level DSLRs), there is no rational reason for Canon to stop selling those existing bodies, and the kit lenses that sell like hotcakes with them. The focus of R&D spend is obviously on R series bodies, and RF series lenses, but that doesn't mean that new lower and entry-level DSLRs and M bodies (and maybe even lenses to go with them) won't be released. They probably will be, although we won't know that until (eg) the rumoured lower-$ R series bodies are announced later this year. 

And, with all respect, it takes a special degree of intransigence not to acknowledge that.


----------



## HMC11 (Feb 15, 2022)

Jethro said:


> As keeps being said here interminably, until there are low / entry level-priced RF bodies on the market, and they are being popularly taken up (in preference to M-series and entry level DSLRs), there is no rational reason for Canon to stop selling those existing bodies, and the kit lenses that sell like hotcakes with them. The focus of R&D spend is obviously on R series bodies, and RF series lenses, but that doesn't mean that new lower and entry-level DSLRs and M bodies (and maybe even lenses to go with them) won't be released. They probably will be, although we won't know that until (eg) the rumoured lower-$ R series bodies are announced later this year.


May I also add that given the strong sales of the APCS systems (DSLR & M), as long as they are not making a loss, it does make sense to keep it going to continue to capture the mindshare for the Canon brand, as well as to use that as a pathway for at least some to transit into FF (RF). I am assuming, though it could be wrong, that prosumers who are already familiar with the Canon system would tend to stick with the same brand if they transit to FF.


----------



## sanj (Feb 15, 2022)

Jethro said:


> _Some_ EF (and EF-S) lenses are being discontinued. Not all of them. And there is no indication at all that blanket discontinuance of DSLRs (or M series bodies) will happen 'soon'. As a matter of interest, what does 'soon' actually mean to you? This year? Within 3 years? 5 years? 10?
> 
> As keeps being said here interminably, until there are low / entry level-priced RF bodies on the market, and they are being popularly taken up (in preference to M-series and entry level DSLRs), there is no rational reason for Canon to stop selling those existing bodies, and the kit lenses that sell like hotcakes with them. The focus of R&D spend is obviously on R series bodies, and RF series lenses, but that doesn't mean that new lower and entry-level DSLRs and M bodies (and maybe even lenses to go with them) won't be released. They probably will be, although we won't know that until (eg) the rumoured lower-$ R series bodies are announced later this year.
> 
> And, with all respect, it takes a special degree of intransigence not to acknowledge that.


Oh. I stand corrected. I thought Canon has discontinued all EF lenses. I misread this CR post I think.


----------



## Jethro (Feb 15, 2022)

Yeah, no ...


----------



## Jethro (Feb 15, 2022)

sanj said:


> Oh. I stand corrected. I thought Canon has discontinued all EF lenses. I misread this CR post I think.


Man, that would have been news!


----------



## LogicExtremist (Feb 15, 2022)

The Buddhists tell us that one of the causes of suffering is mistaking temporary things for permanent things, and becoming attached to them, or something like that...

All technology platforms have a finite life, including the EF and EF-S lens mount systems. Canon will keep on producing the cameras and lenses that are profitable to manufacture, and slowly phase out the ones that aren't. Over time, they will look to phase out the older system, to rationalise or "optimize" their product lines.

To quote the Petapixel article:

_"Canon has gone on the record in the past saying that it doesn’t like to think of lenses as being discontinued or abandoned, but rather that the system is being optimized. Canon is clearly focused on mirrorless in 2022, and more EF lens discontinuations should be expected."_

In the meanwhile, all EF and EF-S cameras will still continue to work perfectly well, and produce the same quality they've always produced. Pro photographers will keep using their current gear until it breaks, or until there is some financial advantage in moving over to the RF system. Most regular people will still buy masses of M50s and Rebel cameras, and for these people, a kit lens or a kit with two kit lenses will be plenty.

On the EF-S platform, to complement a kit lens, the 55-250mm, and 10-18mm covered the long and wide end. The compact EF-S 24mm pancake and EF 50mm 1.8 covered a lot of the common focal lengths for primes and a EF 100mm took care of macro and longer prime. Those five lenses could do plenty and had half-decent IQ! A small handful of M-series lenses caters to all the needs of everyday users on that platform, especially with the Sigma offerings. 

These two groups, Rebel and EOS M users, most likely constitute the greater portion of Canon's photography market and revenue stream. There's a lot more of them than pro-am or pro photographers, and they don't need that many lenses.

Canon discontinuing lenses just means that people who use them will either have to get them repaired, buy second-hand replacements, or eventually have to move over to the RF platform. By then the older camera bodies will have expired anyway, as lenses last a lot longer than camera bodies these days...


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 15, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> DSLRs comprise 40% of ILC sales. Canon holds the majority of that. Remember when the consumer DSLR would be dead in 5 years? I think that was 2013.
> 
> Soon is relative.



I remember a lot of folks proclaiming the DSLR was already dead when Sony introduced the first α7. Wasn't that 2013? There was no "five years from now" in many of the proclamations. It was, "THE DSLR IS DEAD! LONG LIVE THE SONY MILC!"


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Not according to this BS list of all but nine lenses being discontinued



Technically, the TS-E lenses are not EF lenses, because their name does not begin, "EF..."

So saying "all except nine EF lenses have been discontinued" says nothing about TS-E lenses.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The entire list of every officially discontinued lens is right there.
> There is no need for any speculation:
> 
> 
> ...



The three TS-E lenses in that list were all replaced by newer TS-E lenses about a decade ago. Those three were older designs.


----------



## AlanF (Feb 15, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The entire list of every officially discontinued lens is right there.
> There is no need for any speculation:
> 
> 
> ...


They haven't got the EF 1200mm f/5.6 on that list.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 15, 2022)

privatebydesign said:


> Need and money making rarely go hand in hand. If the 135 f2 had been a big seller there is every reason to think there would have been iterations just as there were with the superteles, the 2.8 zooms, the 85 f1.2, the 35 f1.4, the TS-E's, etc etc.



Primes have always had a slower replacement cycle than zooms. The original 35/1.4 L came out in 1998. The EF 35mm f/1.4 L II didn't appear until 2015. That seemed, more than anything else, to be prompted by the Sigma 35mm ART that takes better pictures of flat test charts.

In the case of the EF 135mm f/2, those who use it know that flat test charts aren't the only measure of a lens' usefulness for taking images of a 3D world. But overdoing flat field correction to get better corners in a test chart photo has consequences for how out of focus areas look in photos of three dimensional spaces.

The last thing Canon needed to do was replace the EF 135mm f/2 L with a newer version that produced clinical looking images with nasty bokeh like Sigma's 135. Let the uninformed Philistines rave about how great their Sigma 135s are because they're so good at imaging flat test charts while the rest of us make beautiful photos with our "outdated" EF 135mm f/2 L lenses!




Canon could have probably sold a few more EF 135mm f/2 L II lenses over the past five years than they actually sold EF 135mm f/2 L lenses over that same time period, but they probably would not have sold enough more of them to recover the additional R&D they would have spent to create such a lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 15, 2022)

sanj said:


> It takes a special kind of intelligence to not see that if EF lenses are being discontinued, DSLR will soon follow.





sanj said:


> Oh. I stand corrected. I thought Canon has discontinued all EF lenses. I misread this CR post I think.


Yet still you managed to deliver a (not very well) veiled insult based on your misunderstanding of the facts. @unfocused should be very disappointed in the behavior you are modeling here for the forum.


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Feb 15, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> ...to be prompted by the Sigma 35mm ART that takes better pictures of flat test charts. ...


Only when it was in focus 
[EDIT] (Sorry, to be more precise, I mean : "Only when it was not out of focus", in fact )...


----------



## SteveC (Feb 15, 2022)

I have yet to understand why, when the post was about EF lenses being discontinued, some seemed to imagine it was the death knell for EF-M.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 15, 2022)

SteveC said:


> I have yet to understand why, when the post was about EF lenses being discontinued, some seemed to imagine it was the death knell for EF-M.


Illogical segues are a common CR member trademark. It's rare a thread stays OT.


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Feb 15, 2022)

SteveC said:


> I have yet to understand why, when the post was about EF lenses being discontinued, some seemed to imagine it was the death knell for EF-M.


Especially when a simple fact checking at this right time is enough to see that none of the EF-M lenses has been discontinued anywhere, and that most gears of the system are still available new nearly everywhere (with the exception of 18-55mm kit lens, that has been discontinued long before now, for some other reasons )... 
It looks like some here wants EOS M line-up to die since the beginning, and I'm still wondering why...  
Everything has an end, for sure, but if this system can talk, it would have kept saying "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated" since last five years at least...


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 15, 2022)

2 cents said:


> The R5 will be a great travel camera though.


The RP’s even better


----------



## SteveC (Feb 15, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Illogical segues are a common CR member trademark. It's rare a thread stays OT.



This was almost immediate; if I recall, the second or third comment started talking about EF-M


----------



## SteveC (Feb 15, 2022)

Pierre Lagarde said:


> Especially when a simple fact checking at this right time is enough to see that none of the EF-M lenses has been discontinued anywhere, and that most gears of the system are still available new nearly everywhere (with the exception of 18-55mm kit lens, that has been discontinued long before now, for some other reasons )...
> It looks like some here wants EOS M line-up to die since the beginning, and I'm still wondering why...
> Everything has an end, for sure, but if this system can talk, it would have kept saying "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated" since last five years at least...



Some people, especially some people in the APS-C crowd, act as if they're afraid they can't have their R7 while EF-M exists. Fortunately many others among them are far more rational.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 15, 2022)

SteveC said:


> Some people, especially some people in the APS-C crowd, act as if they're afraid they can't have their R7 while EF-M exists. Fortunately many others among them are far more rational.


There is also the fact that the previous owner of this website had, in some people's opinion, a "thing" about the M System and gave credence to rumors about its demise.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 15, 2022)

unfocused said:


> There is also the fact that the previous owner of this website had, in some people's opinion, a "thing" about the M System and gave credence to rumors about its demise.


btw, Craig says he's moving to Spain to be closer to his wife's family. Plus he hinted at a new venture in the works. I wish him well in all of it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 16, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Illogical segues are a common CR member trademark. It's rare a thread stays OT.


Well, since we're already well OT, perhaps an even more radical drift is in order.

I just took a closer look at your profile pic (on my Mac instead of my iPhone), which I now realize is quite apt for your username. I really enjoyed the time I spent in Switzerland (about 3 months total spread over 2 years).

I'll see your Blue Zurich with a Blue Luzern:

"Kapellbrücke at Night"



EOS 1D X, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM @ 50mm, 20 s, f/11, ISO 200

...and raise you a Blue Basel panorama:

"Rhine Basel"



EOS 1D X, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM @ 59mm, 10 s, f/9, ISO 400; 13 shots in portrait orientation


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 16, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> I am sure Canon prefers to sell more RF cameras than DSLR or M cameras.


Why would that be?
Money is money.
Canon is investing more into mirrorless because they project a better return on investment.
I have no doubt that Canon makes more money from a single 1DX III sale than a single R6 sale.
If Canon could sell as many 1DX III DSLRs as they do R6 mirrorless I have no doubt that they would.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

privatebydesign said:


> Need and money making rarely go hand in hand. If the 135 f2 had been a big seller there is every reason to think there would have been iterations just as there were with the superteles, the 2.8 zooms, the 85 f1.2, the 35 f1.4, the TS-E's, etc etc.



Zooms are an entirely different animal than primes. Fifteen years ago if anyone had suggested that even a higher end zoom could compete with a mid-grade prime on IQ they would have been laughed off this forum. That's no longer the case.

Super Telephotos have improved much more in terms of weight and balance, and IS than in terms of IQ.

The TS-E lenses were updated to incorporate the new variable on-the-fly adjustment of the tilt and shift axes relative to one another. Canon calls it TS Rotation.

The EF 85mm f/1.2 was updated with a faster AF motor, at least relative to the original model that was excruciatingly slow.

The big difference with most other non-ST primes has been to move from labor intensive hand assembled designs to machine assembled designs.

That, and the whole idea that has taken root over the last decade or so that the only measure of a lens' worth is how well it images a flat test chart.

The EF 135mm f/2 L already had outstanding IQ in the areas that a fast 135mm lens is typically put to use. Two-dimensional reproduction work is usually done with shorter focal lengths, or with larger formats and scanning backs.

There's no pressing demand to reduce the size/weight of the EF 135/2 when compared to more recent offerings from Sigma _et al_ that dwarf the Canon lens.

As telephotos go, it's a fairly simple design that wouldn't benefit as much from automation as other, more complex designs, such as a retrofocus 35mm f/1.4, do.

Compare the block diagram of the EF 135mm f/2 L







to the block diagram of the EF 35mm f/1.4 L II


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

entoman said:


> I have 5DMkiv and R5. Nowadays my photography is purely for my own pleasure, but I'm often shooting in tough environments, and many of my photographs are unrepeatable. There's no second chance, so above all I need dependability. Yes, the R5 freezes occasionally and chews batteries, but otherwise is fine, and offers me advantages in certain situations. I keep the 5DMkiv because I know that it's utterly dependable, and I can absolutely understand anyone who prefers DSLRs and doesn't want the expense (and the learning curve) of switching to mirrorless.
> 
> I also agree about the 100mm macros - the EF version is more than sharp enough for the R5 sensor, and I rarely need to go closer than 1:2. The aspherical aberration control on the RF version may be of value to portrait or wedding photographers, but it's wasted on me.
> 
> But although I will continue to buy certain EF lenses that I prefer over the RF versions, I'm not at all bothered about what you call their "premature" abandonment. Sure, quite a few of the lenses have been discontinued, but there are tens of thousands of them available in pristine condition on the secondhand market. I bought my TS-E 24mm and my 180mm macro secondhand, and any others that I want will be available secondhand for many years to come. Why buy new, when there are so many mint secondhand lenses available?



I've noticed that since Canon has discontinued many EF lenses, the used market for those same lenses has gotten tighter. In some cases it's also gotten more expensive.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

Skux said:


> How is the 85mm f1.8 still in production lol



It's probably not actually in production. They've still got remaining stock to sell, though. It's a pretty good lens, especially for its price point, in real world usage as long as you're not looking for flat test chart reproduction bragging rights.

Canon used to stockpile their most popular lenses in huge batches. If you're interested, look for groups that compare and compile serial number and lens code (date/plant/rev) databases. Some fairly popular lenses have holes for as long as 2-3 years when apparently none were produced, then a bunch were produced in a six month span, then no more for another couple of years.





Street shot outside a bar on Halloween. Sodium vapor lights on street plus just a bit of flash either camera mounted or held wide in my left hand. Hand held, EOS 5D Mark IV + EF 85mm f/1.8, 1/80, f/2.2, ISO 3200.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> True, although we don't know when the plan to update the M50 to the M50 mkII actually started, and, in terms of investment in the M system, the last real investments imho have been in 2019 (M6 mkII and M200) and 2018 (32mm and etc.)
> 
> To be clear, I do not wish the M mount to wither away, but I do think that it will, in fact, decline, regardless of our or Canon's wishes, unless Canon does something material about that, and I also think that the likelihood of Canon doing something material about that is low.



The entire EOS-M system is marketed at folks who might buy a camera and a couple of lenses once every five years or so. They then use it without constantly worrying about who has a newer/brighter/cooler/better camera coming out next week. They're not gearheads. They're people who want more than a phone for those special moments when their kids have birthday parties or they go on a nice vacation or visit the zoo. Just because a few gearheads buy an EOS M camera to use as a small, lightweight "pocket camera" when they don't want to tote their pro gear around does not mean they are the primary buyers of EOS M systems. They aren't.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> I am sure Canon prefers to sell more RF cameras than DSLR or M cameras.



I am at least equally sure that Canon also prefers having products to sell to people who would never, ever consider an RF mount camera and half a dozen RF lenses. That's who the EOS M line has always been aimed at. Those who are looking for a compact, lightweight, and relatively inexpensive camera and lens or two that will last them for a few years.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

Sporgon said:


> The RP’s even better


 The EOS M50 Mark II is even better if lightweight and compact is your primary priority.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

SteveC said:


> This was almost immediate; if I recall, the second or third comment started talking about EF-M



I'm wondering if the current script from Sony for their paid shills includes the EOS-M system's premature demise high on the list?


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

Pierre Lagarde said:


> Only when it was in focus
> [EDIT] (Sorry, to be more precise, I mean : "Only when it was not out of focus", in fact )...



90% or more of the folks that base lens purchases on test chart results (that is to say, about 85% of all lens purchasers these days) have no clue that MTF and other "sharpness" tests are done with manual focus.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 16, 2022)

SteveC said:


> This was almost immediate; if I recall, the second or third comment started talking about EF-M



It was the first comment after the initial post. But it was, in fact, positive about the EOS-M system and said:

"It's no surprise to me that M lenses continue to be produced, as the cameras sell extremely well, especially in Asia."


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 16, 2022)

entoman said:


> If 6 EF-S lenses are still in production, that might indicate the Canon still intends to release (or at least, continue manufacturing) APS-C DSLRs. Even the lowest priced new RF model will likely be at least twice the cost of a budget crop DSLR.
> 
> It's no surprise to me that M lenses continue to be produced, as the cameras sell extremely well, especially in Asia.


The DSLR lives on! Not.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 16, 2022)

I'm surprised that the ef 135mm f2.0 L has been discontinued. However...we all know that Canon have been holding back a revision for it for years. I'm guessing a new RF version with IS, closer MFD and slightly brighter is on the RF lens slate.
The 135L is one of the most versatile tele's available. 135mm is a sweet spot for portraits. Pop a 25mm extender on it and it can pass for a general walkabouts macro lens. Pop a 1.4x TC and you have a 190mm f2.8. Pop a 2x TC and it's a 270mm f4. It's light and small. Rugged enough and it's IQ is excellent. 
I often choose this lens over my 70-200 f2.8 II LIS. The difference between 135mm and 200mm isn't that great, often a few steps forwards (where possible). If I have a 24-70 on my other camera then the 135L make a nice tele. A lot less bulky than my 70-200 f2.8 II LIS.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 16, 2022)

PerKr said:


> Just before the new year, a canon executive confirmed that the 1Dx mkIII was the last carnon DSLR. That means no more EF mount bodies will be developed. There is no point in keeping the cheaper penta-mirror line. They will produce, and sell, these items as long as they make money off them but they will be gone. And they will be replaced with RF counterparts, if they are replaced at all; people are not as interested in ILC's now as they were 10 years ago.


DSLRs (the lenses) will be popular again in 20-30 yrs. There will be countless forums and facebook groups dedicated to them. People will get giddy about the "look" of a DSLR taken photo and opine for the good old days when there were "real" cameras.

That's how I *duped myself* into believing I just had to have 50+ year old lens tech (over 50 of those old dogs) adapted to my digital cameras. 

I've since grown up.


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Feb 16, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> 90% or more of the folks that base lens purchases on test chart results (that is to say, about 85% of all lens purchasers these days) have no clue that MTF and other "sharpness" tests are done with manual focus.


Indeed. To be more precise about what I think of the 35mm 1.4 Sigma : I bought it, partly because of those charts. Tried it and found pictures to be so flat (I was used to 135mm F/2, or simply the Canon 50mm 1.4, so it was hard for the Sigma when it comes to comparison). Then came the autofocus concerns on sessions... brought it back and had a cash-back to buy the Canon - the first version that was so worst than the Sigma, as you could read everywhere on the internet when the Sigma was launched. Ok, pixel peeping, the Canon was a tad less sharper than the Sigma on the 6D, but everything else was better, by far, especially colours and contrasts. And autofocus was usable, at least . Lesson learned. Some Sigma lenses are correct, but their quality/price ratios have nothing special and most of the time is far worst than Canon's. The only problem with Canon is you usually need to put more bucks on the table to enter. I tried several Sigmas since then, and the only one I kept is the EF-M version of their 56mm 1.4. It's a great lens, no doubt (with excellent colours, contrasts and correct autofocus, wow  !).


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 16, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> The EOS M50 Mark II is even better if lightweight and compact is your primary priority.


The G1X Mark III is even better if lightweight and compact is your primary priority .


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Feb 16, 2022)

SteveC said:


> Some people, especially some people in the APS-C crowd, act as if they're afraid they can't have their R7 while EF-M exists. ...


More likely, the R5 is a better reason why there is no R7 for the moment .


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 16, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Why would that be?
> Money is money.
> Canon is investing more into mirrorless because they project a better return on investment.


Not sure what you are trying to say? It seems you are agreeing with me.


EOS 4 Life said:


> I have no doubt that Canon makes more money from a single 1DX III sale than a single R6 sale.
> If Canon could sell as many 1DX III DSLRs as they do R6 mirrorless I have no doubt that they would.


Indeed. But those cameras target materially different markets.


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 16, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> The entire EOS-M system is marketed at folks who might buy a camera and a couple of lenses once every five years or so. They then use it without constantly worrying about who has a newer/brighter/cooler/better camera coming out next week. They're not gearheads. They're people who want more than a phone for those special moments when their kids have birthday parties or they go on a nice vacation or visit the zoo. Just because a few gearheads buy an EOS M camera to use as a small, lightweight "pocket camera" when they don't want to tote their pro gear around does not mean they are the primary buyers of EOS M systems. They aren't.


But the market you are describing is eroding. I was at a birthday party for one of my daughter's schoolmates a few months ago. There were 30 kids with parents. There was only 1 non-cellphone camera to be seen, that being my R5. 
Sure, that episode is not statistical proof, but it seems to me that we gear heads are one of the few remaining niches of a dwindling market who still buy camera and lenses, so manufacturers are catering for gear heads more and more.

Consider the introduction of new APS and FF cameras by Canon + Nikon + Sony:
2017 APS: 6 - FF: 4
2018 APS: 4 - FF: 5
2019 APS: 8 - FF: 4
2020 APS: 4 - FF: 8
2021 APS: 2 - FF: 6
2022 (so far) APS: 0 - FF: 1
If you count crop vs. FF lenses I am pretty sure that the picture would be even more stark.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Feb 16, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> It's probably not actually in production. They've still got remaining stock to sell, though. It's a pretty good lens, especially for its price point, in real world usage as long as you're not looking for flat test chart reproduction bragging rights.
> 
> Canon used to stockpile their most popular lenses in huge batches.


So many people told us that Canon pivoting to RF would not have a big impact because there was such a big stockpile of EF lenses.
Now after just of few years many of these lenses ran out of stock.
Of few have no viable replacements through either third parties or the RF mount.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 16, 2022)

EOS 4 Life said:


> So many people told us that Canon pivoting to RF would not have a big impact because there was such a big stockpile of EF lenses.
> Now after just of few years many of these lenses ran out of stock.
> Of few have no viable replacements through either third parties or the RF mount.


I'm still seeing quite a good selection, new and used from reputable sellers such as B&H, MPB and Keh not to mention FM, Ebay and CL.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 16, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> Street shot outside a bar on Halloween. Sodium vapor lights on street plus just a bit of flash either camera mounted or held wide in my left hand. Hand held, EOS 5D Mark IV + EF 85mm f/1.8, 1/80, f/2.2, ISO 3200.


After I got the 6D2 I used my 100mm macro for portraits, but didn’t like the look. So I bought a refurbed 85mm f/1.8 for some trivial amount of money. I went into downtown to try it out on large brick walls and such. I started shooting other things, and was really pleased with the results. It is certainly the best lens for the money I ever got. It acquits itself really well for my intended purpose and also does fine as a general purpose short telephoto. One use I had not anticipated was shooting video of myself for use in little squares during the pandemic in a virtual choir and in multi-language readings of Acts 2. (I was assigned the original Ancient Greek, which I hadn’t read aloud to any degree for 45 years.) I was in the Wally Cox square one time, and I forget which of the Bradys I was another time.


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 16, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> I am at least equally sure that Canon also prefers having products to sell to people who would never, ever consider an RF mount camera and half a dozen RF lenses. That's who the EOS M line has always been aimed at. Those who are looking for a compact, lightweight, and relatively inexpensive camera and lens or two that will last them for a few years.


This is where we disagree. Not in the sense that Canon would not go for market penetration, but in the sense of "is the market you describe a viable proposition?".
My sense is that it is becoming increasingly less so because: a) that market is dwindling in numbers, and b) market contraction and supply chain issues are forcing Canon (and other manufacturers) to focus on the most profitable parts of the remaining market, meaning the people that still buy pro/prosumer cameras and lenses


----------



## SteveC (Feb 16, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> It was the first comment after the initial post. But it was, in fact, positive about the EOS-M system and said:
> 
> "It's no surprise to me that M lenses continue to be produced, as the cameras sell extremely well, especially in Asia."


Maps, comment four, extended the doomsaying to EF-M.


----------



## Joules (Feb 16, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> In the case of the EF 135mm f/2, those who use it know that flat test charts aren't the only measure of a lens' usefulness for taking images of a 3D world. [...] The last thing Canon needed to do was replace the EF 135mm f/2 L with a newer version that produced clinical looking images with nasty bokeh like Sigma's 135. Let the uninformed Philistines rave about how great their Sigma 135s are because they're so good at imaging flat test charts while the rest of us make beautiful photos with our "outdated" EF 135mm f/2 L lenses!


The world could be a nicer place if we would be able to appreciate the value of one thing on its own, without having to degrade another thing in the process.

Do you need to be uniformed in order to appreciate sharpness? Or is it also possible to look at the properties of a product as a whole and judge them in the context of one's own values and use cases?

I don't see anything wrong with the bokeh of my personal Sigma 35 mm 1.4 (Also not in the side by side comparison to the old Canon version on this site). Nor in the images from the 135 mm I've looked up online. I'm genuinely curious what justifies the negative comments, so if you have a comparison that demonstrates in what way the Canon lens delivers different results, could you please point me in the right direction?

I'm well aware of your point about an increase in sharpness and flat field having affects on other aspects. But I am unconvinced it really has such a large practical impact and the difference is not more a matter of taste than anything else.

The Canon 50mm 1.2 and 85 mm 1.2 RF lenses for instance are also sharp AF and I don't see anything wrong with them. And on the one lens where Canon gave in and added the option to sacrifice sharpness to alter the bokeh, I've not really seen any praise of that feature - I'm talking about the SA control of the RF 100 mm 2.8 L macro of course.


----------



## tbgtomcom (Feb 16, 2022)

This makes perfect sense considering the shortages of raw materials. May as well use available resources on new technology.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 16, 2022)

Canon just put out a statement:









Canon denies it's discontinuing its EF lenses for DSLRs


There's still life in the old glass yet, according to Canon




www.techradar.com


----------



## unfocused (Feb 16, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Canon just put out a statement:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, a non-denial denial that actually confirms that they are dumping 70 lenses? 

I still find the most interesting thing about this list are the lenses that are being dropped that have no RF replacement on this site's Canon Lens Roadmap. Reading tea leaves, yes, but I'm not sure anyone should be holding their breath for a lens that has been discontinued and is not listed as having an RF replacement coming down the road.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I'm surprised that the ef 135mm f2.0 L has been discontinued. However...we all know that Canon have been holding back a revision for it for years. I'm guessing a new RF version with IS, closer MFD and slightly brighter is on the RF lens slate.
> The 135L is one of the most versatile tele's available. 135mm is a sweet spot for portraits. Pop a 25mm extender on it and it can pass for a general walkabouts macro lens. Pop a 1.4x TC and you have a 190mm f2.8. Pop a 2x TC and it's a 270mm f4. It's light and small. Rugged enough and it's IQ is excellent.
> I often choose this lens over my 70-200 f2.8 II LIS. The difference between 135mm and 200mm isn't that great, often a few steps forwards (where possible). If I have a 24-70 on my other camera then the 135L make a nice tele. A lot less bulky than my 70-200 f2.8 II LIS.



I've never had much luck with my EF 135mm f/2 L + EF1.4X III. The bare lens is very sharp and has good contrast. The lens plus extender is not nearly that sharp, even when carefully manually focused while tripod mounted with wired remote release.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

Pierre Lagarde said:


> More likely, the R5 is a better reason why there is no R7 for the moment .



Things that make you go, "Hmmmm..."


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

CanonFanBoy said:


> DSLRs (the lenses) will be popular again in 20-30 yrs. There will be countless forums and facebook groups dedicated to them. People will get giddy about the "look" of a DSLR taken photo and opine for the good old days when there were "real" cameras.
> 
> That's how I *duped myself* into believing I just had to have 50+ year old lens tech (over 50 of those old dogs) adapted to my digital cameras.
> 
> I've since grown up.



You may have grown up, but you still wish you had that EF 135mm f/2 L which you sold back, don't 'cha?


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> But the market you are describing is eroding. I was at a birthday party for one of my daughter's schoolmates a few months ago. There were 30 kids with parents. There was only 1 non-cellphone camera to be seen, that being my R5.
> Sure, that episode is not statistical proof, but it seems to me that we gear heads are one of the few remaining niches of a dwindling market who still buy camera and lenses, so manufacturers are catering for gear heads more and more.
> 
> Consider the introduction of new APS and FF cameras by Canon + Nikon + Sony:
> ...



It's eroding for sure, but so is the pro market. In the U.S. there are barely 30% as many full-time photojournalists (who do primarily stills imaging for print or web - these days most TV stations call their field video camera operators PJs but we're not talking about those folks) working for news organizations as there were only 10 years ago.

It's also eroding at different rates in different cultures. I'd venture to say that in Asia, and particularly in Japan, you'd see more than one dedicated camera at a child's birthday party with 30 children present.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

stevelee said:


> After I got the 6D2 I used my 100mm macro for portraits, but didn’t like the look. So I bought a refurbed 85mm f/1.8 for some trivial amount of money. I went into downtown to try it out on large brick walls and such. I started shooting other things, and was really pleased with the results. It is certainly the best lens for the money I ever got. It acquits itself really well for my intended purpose and also does fine as a general purpose short telephoto. One use I had not anticipated was shooting video of myself for use in little squares during the pandemic in a virtual choir and in multi-language readings of Acts 2. (I was assigned the original Ancient Greek, which I hadn’t read aloud to any degree for 45 years.) I was in the Wally Cox square one time, and I forget which of the Bradys I was another time.



I laugh inside when I hear folks proclaim loudly as if they have some kind of superior knowledge us mere mortals will never posses about how great macro lenses are for doing portraits because "they're so much sharper than non-macro lenses." 

I usually try to bite my tongue and not reply, "Yes they are certainly sharp when used for the purpose for which they are optimized: to be sharpest at MFD when imaging flat targets perfectly perpendicular to the camera's image plane.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

roby17269 said:


> This is where we disagree. Not in the sense that Canon would not go for market penetration, but in the sense of "is the market you describe a viable proposition?".
> My sense is that it is becoming increasingly less so because: a) that market is dwindling in numbers, and b) market contraction and supply chain issues are forcing Canon (and other manufacturers) to focus on the most profitable parts of the remaining market, meaning the people that still buy pro/prosumer cameras and lenses



What were the ten top selling cameras in Japan last month? 

Low end APS-C DSLRs and EOS M bodies, with one or two compact APS-C Sony bodies also thrown in. Your sense may be misinformed.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

SteveC said:


> Maps, comment four, extended the doomsaying to EF-M.



Yeah, with a byline that says "EOS M7 Please."

He's just mad because the EOS M system is what Canon wants it to be instead of what he wants it to be.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

Joules said:


> The Canon 50mm 1.2 and 85 mm 1.2 RF lenses for instance are also sharp AF and I don't see anything wrong with them. And on the one lens where Canon gave in and added the option to sacrifice sharpness to alter the bokeh, I've not really seen any praise of that feature - I'm talking about the SA control of the RF 100 mm 2.8 L macro of course.



The humble EF 85mm f/1.8 does better flat document reproduction work (i.e. test chart reproduction) than the EF 85mm f/1.2 L. It wipes the floor with the more expensive lens for that use case. But it doesn't produce near the same out of focus areas that the 85 L does.

The RF 85mm f/1.2L is sharper than the EF 85mm f/1.8 on the edges of the frame when imaging a flat test chart, yet still manages to render out of focus areas fairly nicely. But it still doesn't hold a candle to the older EF 85mm f/1.2 L II with how it renders out of focus backgrounds.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

Joules said:


> I don't see anything wrong with the bokeh of my personal Sigma 35 mm 1.4 (Also not in the side by side comparison to the old Canon version on this site). Nor in the images from the 135 mm I've looked up online. I'm genuinely curious what justifies the negative comments, so if you have a comparison that demonstrates in what way the Canon lens delivers different results, could you please point me in the right direction?



My comment said nothing about 35mm lenses. Sensible use cases of 35mm lenses certainly make full field acutance a more important consideration for comparing 35mm lenses than sensible use cases of 135mm lenses make edge acutance a consideration when evaluating 135mm lenses. 

Unless you want to be the best 135mm brick wall photographer in the world, I guess...


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

Joules said:


> The Canon 50mm 1.2 and 85 mm 1.2 RF lenses for instance are also sharp AF and I don't see anything wrong with them. And on the one lens where Canon gave in and added the option to sacrifice sharpness to alter the bokeh, I've not really seen any praise of that feature - I'm talking about the SA control of the RF 100 mm 2.8 L macro of course.



SA control doesn't "give up sharpness to alter the bokeh". It uses apodization to smooth out-of-focus areas without any reduction in acutance of in focus areas.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

unfocused said:


> So, a non-denial denial that actually confirms that they are dumping 70 lenses?
> 
> I still find the most interesting thing about this list are the lenses that are being dropped that have no RF replacement on this site's Canon Lens Roadmap. Reading tea leaves, yes, but I'm not sure anyone should be holding their breath for a lens that has been discontinued and is not listed as having an RF replacement coming down the road.



I'm sure there's a better article somewhere else concerning a Canon press release, but tech radar also says that any release of an "R7" means death for the EOS M system. That same article also thinks simple EF-M to RF adapters are physically possible:

"We would not be surprised to see existing M-mount lenses altered to suit this change, and a (hopefully low-cost and low profile) adapter to let EOS M camera owners upgrade without too many headaches."


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 17, 2022)

CanonFanBoy said:


> The DSLR lives on! Not.



My DSLRs and EF lenses are still doing quite well, thank you.

Equating the end of developing successor models to the death of a product is like equating having their last child to the death of the parents.

When Canon officially discontinues a product is like when those parents retire. They're still not dead, though. They get Social Security and Medicare for years after retirement. They still take trips, go to parties, buy groceries, and complain about rising prices.

When Canon stops service and support for models discontinued years earlier is when those cameras truly begin to die. Even then, they die one body or lens at a time.


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 17, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> It's eroding for sure, but so is the pro market. In the U.S. there are barely 30% as many full-time photojournalists (who do primarily stills imaging for print or web - these days most TV stations call their field video camera operators PJs but we're not talking about those folks) working for news organizations as there were only 10 years ago.


All groups are shrinking apart from mobile phone users and maybe v/bloggers... but my point was that the "gear heads" are probably shrinking slower than other groups and, more importantly, especially for manufacturers that are constrained by supply chain issues, they are one of the few remaining groups willing to spend non-trivial amounts of money for their professions / hobbies 


Michael Clark said:


> It's also eroding at different rates in different cultures. I'd venture to say that in Asia, and particularly in Japan, you'd see more than one dedicated camera at a child's birthday party with 30 children present.


Sure. As I said, I do not consider that particular episode proof of anything. For what it is worth, I've been to other bdays and it's either just me or me and another dad who is himself another gear head  ... but it is the same group of people so again no real statistical proof. I'm based near NY in the USA which is still an important market.


----------



## stevelee (Feb 17, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> The humble EF 85mm f/1.8 does better flat document reproduction work (i.e. test chart reproduction) than the EF 85mm f/1.2 L. It wipes the floor with the more expensive lens for that use case. But it doesn't produce near the same out of focus areas that the 85 L does.
> 
> The RF 85mm f/1.2L is sharper than the EF 85mm f/1.8 on the edges of the frame when imaging a flat test chart, yet still manages to render out of focus areas fairly nicely. But it still doesn't hold a candle to the older EF 85mm f/1.2 L II with how it renders out of focus backgrounds.


OK, so people buy the f/1.2 to make backgrounds blurrier and to make the corners sharp. Hmmmm.


----------



## roby17269 (Feb 17, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> What were the ten top selling cameras in Japan last month?
> 
> Low end APS-C DSLRs and EOS M bodies, with one or two compact APS-C Sony bodies also thrown in. Your sense may be misinformed.


Maybe I am indeed a negative nelly, or maybe Japan does not accurately represent the world.
At the risk of repeating myself, Micro 4/3rd users often mentioned the fact that Olympus was doing well in Japan, but that was not enough to keep Olympus in the market. Obviously Canon is in a different position compared to Olympus.

Canon may very well have plans to keep DSLRs and / or M alive. But I guess my view is what I have explained and I will need something concrete, such as the introduction of new cameras / lenses to change my mind.

Note that I am not saying that Canon has to change my mind


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 18, 2022)

Canon probably won't discontinue EF mount. And while I do think RF everything is better, it's iterative you know? There's nothing stopping them from making EF just as good or better in the next go around. Of course, the big thing 99% of people won't care about is that EF lenses still work great on EF film cameras. Film is pretty much dead as a doornail but it's possible we haven't seen the last of film. If you're a purist who hates the idea of having algorithms modify your images, film is the only way to go.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 19, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> You may have grown up, but you still wish you had that EF 135mm f/2 L which you sold back, don't 'cha?


I bought another.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 19, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> My DSLRs and EF lenses are still doing quite well, thank you.
> 
> Equating the end of developing successor models to the death of a product is like equating having their last child to the death of the parents.
> 
> ...


Yeah, well, your DSLR gear ain't living creatures. If course they are fine. Mine too. That ain't the point, Hoss. DSLR camera production is dead, or taking last gasps.

I have an old Ford F-150. Decades and decades old. I can still get parts. I can still drive it. However, that particular model is dead. Just had it at the dealership for a repair last week. It's still a dead product. Soon, ICE's will be dead too, with major manufacturers pledging to go all electric.

The DSLR is dead. It has an heir, but it is dead.


----------



## Joules (Feb 19, 2022)

Michael Clark said:


> My comment said nothing about 35mm lenses. Sensible use cases of 35mm lenses certainly make full field acutance a more important consideration for comparing 35mm lenses than sensible use cases of 135mm lenses make edge acutance a consideration when evaluating 135mm lenses.
> 
> Unless you want to be the best 135mm brick wall photographer in the world, I guess...


Perhaps my comment on the 35mm 1.4 Art should have been directed at one of the subsequent posts which mentioned (the real) focusing issues of the lens.

Anyways, my issue was specifically with your comment about people who cherish the Sigma 135mm 1.8 being uninformed and the lens producing nasty results. I am curious what justifies this strong lenses, as any comparision I have found so does not make it apparrent to my eyes what the issue with the Sigma lens is.

Here, the Canon is on the left, the sigma on the right. I don't see anything noteworthy about the transition.


Source: https://jolsonweddings.com/education/sigma-135mm-art-lens-review

Here is a more complex scene, and while minor differences in the background blur's character, I fail to notice the nastines.


Source: 




There don't seem to be that many direct comparisons between these lenses in particular, or at least I could not find them. So since you seem to have a much better source for detecting the differences that justify your choice of words, I would appreciate it if you could share that or at least point out what I am missing in the images above if they already demonstrate your issue with the Sigma lens.



Michael Clark said:


> The humble EF 85mm f/1.8 does better flat document reproduction work (i.e. test chart reproduction) than the EF 85mm f/1.2 L. It wipes the floor with the more expensive lens for that use case. But it doesn't produce near the same out of focus areas that the 85 L does.
> 
> The RF 85mm f/1.2L is sharper than the EF 85mm f/1.8 on the edges of the frame when imaging a flat test chart, yet still manages to render out of focus areas fairly nicely. But it still doesn't hold a candle to the older EF 85mm f/1.2 L II with how it renders out of focus backgrounds.


Same thing here. This video contains a few side by side comparisons between Canons 85 mm 1.2 lenses and I don't see what is supposed to give the older lens an advantage.



Michael Clark said:


> SA control doesn't "give up sharpness to alter the bokeh". It uses apodization to smooth out-of-focus areas without any reduction in acutance of in focus areas.


I'm confused. The SA stands for spherical abberation control - I though apodization was a different mechanism. Am I wrong?

In any case, the SA slider does definitvely affect sharpness. Just look at the official trailer video: 



Clearly the image is much sharper when the slider is set to 0, although the background is more fuzzy at the one extreme and more "bubble like" at the other. I thought you attributed the supposed degradation in background blur quality to excessive correction of spherical abberation and therefore this effect that Canon added to the RF 100 mm 2.8 macro was related to the topic. After all, Canon claims it is spherical abberation at play here (Further info on that, although in German: https://www.canon-eos-r-forum.de/topic/36-rf-100mm-f28-l-macro-is-usm-mehr-infos-zu-sa-control/)


----------



## Blue Zurich (Feb 19, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> Canon probably won't discontinue EF mount. And while I do think RF everything is better, it's iterative you know? There's nothing stopping them from making EF just as good or better in the next go around. Of course, the big thing 99% of people won't care about is that EF lenses still work great on EF film cameras. Film is pretty much dead as a doornail but it's possible we haven't seen the last of film. If you're a purist who hates the idea of having algorithms modify your images, film is the only way to go.


Film is too tough for most shooters these days regardless of darkroom availability and tools. It requires dedication, trial and error and actual thinking. Todays cameras are too easy and thats exactly how many want them to be. Occasionally I do as well. . No judgement here. Shooting and processing both gives me a level of satisfaction just digital could never provide. YMMV, oh and by no means do I want this to segue into a film debate, too many of those here getting nasty in the past.


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 19, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> If you're a purist who hates the idea of having algorithms modify your images, film is the only way to go.


I’d have added ‘reversal / slide’ film there and viewed on a light box. Negative film output can be modified nearly as much as digital , as I’m sure you know.


----------

