Rumored Canon EOS M7 camera specifications, and the end of the line for EOS M? [CR1]

[Chig]

Well, yes, of course. But it follows that if they don't do as you suggest then it might not be worth their while.



Speak for yourself. I would be fine either way. What market research of 7D users have you conducted? I would bet Canon has.



Okay. So you what to use EF lenses with your APS-C body. You can do that just as easily with an M mount as with an RF mount. And, you would prefer the R5, but don't want to pay that much for a body. Yet you are talking about big white EF lenses and new RF mount lenses. The big whites already cost more than the R5 and have you taken a look at the prices of RF lenses?

Already own 2 big white lenses which I bought second hand the EF400 f/5.6 and the EF300 f/2.8 non is and i really dislike the ergonomics of dinky little M mount cameras so if Canon wants me (And all the 7D ii owners)to buy a new body they need to offer something we want like an RF aps-c with say a downsized 17mp version of the R5 sensor

 

[Chig]

When we speak about the logic, then what about the following arguments? For how many years there were DSLR APS-C cameras? Maybe apart from the SL1/2, they were nowhere near the small size of the M body.

The problem is not in EOS-M family cameras as per se, but in missing M bodies of certain ergonomic aspects. No 7DII user is going to switch to M5 kind of the camer imo. The other problem REALLY is the lens. Forget the EF, it's EOL, period.

So, what I think is, that Canon should keep EOS-M as a completly separate line, which perfectly fits its purpose. But then they could potentially introduced an RF mount based APS-C family. As - why not? Canon surely have numbers. Where do they move all those DLSR users to? To much smaller and different ergonomy M family? Producing bigger M body with an M mount? Makes no sense imo.

Since the R line release, my prediction is, that there is going to be APS-C R variant one day. It depends on how cheap FF can get. If APS-C could go much cheaper, than it will likely happen.

If I could afford it I’d buy the R5 which is the best wildlife camera ever made but second best for me is a aps-c R7 with a downsized 17mp R5 sensor to give more reach (like the R5 has in crop mode) but a bit more affordable

 

[SteveC]

Already own 2 big white lenses which I bought second hand the EF400 f/5.6 and the EF300 f/2.8 non is and i really dislike the ergonomics of dinky little M mount cameras so if Canon wants me (And all the 7D ii owners)to buy a new body they need to offer something we want like an RF aps-c with say a downsized 17mp version of the R5 sensor

Again, you presume to speak for "all the 7D ii owners." If you want to be taken serious, stop this jackass behavior, since at least one owner has told everyone you don't speak for him.

 

[Fletchahh]

Already own 2 big white lenses which I bought second hand the EF400 f/5.6 and the EF300 f/2.8 non is and i really dislike the ergonomics of dinky little M mount cameras so if Canon wants me (And all the 7D ii owners)to buy a new body they need to offer something we want like an RF aps-c with say a downsized 17mp version of the R5 sensor

I feel I'm in a similar situation (7D Mark II & used 100-400mm II), and I'd much rather the smaller M with the 32mp sensor all else being equal. For ergonomics, I'd just add an L-bracket with grip (like something made by SmallRig), and at the moment not having access to the newest RF lenses doesn't particularly bother me since (at this point) I have bought all my lenses used.

But that's just what would be best for me, in my eyes.

 

[Michael Clark]

To be honest that last part sounds like wishful thinking from Mr. Majestyk.

M is one of the best selling camera lines on Earth. OK they may kill it but they will have to replace it with something else.

That all depends upon how much that entire market segment is shrinking. At this point, the demise of the entire EOS M system seems more like click-bait to me, though. If Canon were pulling the plug by the end of 2021, they wouldn't bother with an M7 at all. Particularly since it seems little more than an M6 Mark II with an integral EVF, IBIS, and dual card slots.

 

[Michael Clark]

What do you suppose the possibilities are of them discontinuing it in some markets where it hasn't done that well?

More likely than killing it completely. Though SARS-CoV-2 may have killed M sales in their tracks considering the regions where it was selling well and the types of consumers to whom it was marketed.

 

[Michael Clark]

Yeah. Come back when it’s a Canon Press Release. Zero sense in maintaining the M line production when you can completely replace it with Uniform upgradeable glass on a singular mount system and transition over to the same end result

Yeah, especially when most of the world areas where the M sells well has very few potential buyers who have the luxury of "upgrading" constantly before the camera they already have gives up the ghost.

 

[Michael Clark]

I agree with the consensus that these rumors sound like mere forum reverberations.

But to those who think Canon wouldn't kill the M line because it's a best-seller, I'd just say that Canon may find that it can make more net profit by forcing people in that market to buy a very small full frame R-line camera like the RP. People who buy the RP typically would have access to glass that gives Canon 100's of dollars of margin, versus 10's of dollars of margin. Their market research may (or may not) indicate that they could get a majority of current M buyers to buy into the RF system, creating bigger margins and also creating much better development and manufacturing efficiencies. They may surmise that having a system that sits between your phone and an RP is a bit of a nether world. I'm not saying any of these conditions are true. I don't know. But it is very possible.

I'm sure Fuji and Sony agree with you.

If Canon pulls the plug on the EOS M system, that is where the majority of the buyers are going.

 

[Michael Clark]

B & H is selling EOS RP with the slower ( cheaper ) 24-105 lens for $1300. I am wondering who will pay $1500 for M7 that has only one lens that may be good enough for 32MP APS-C sensor.

Those who want IBIS and more than 3 fps with AF between each frame?

 

[Michael Clark]

It’s a possibility, I can’t deny that, but let’s delve a little bit more

People who only have M lenses and the eos-m bodies, why does Canon think if they forced them to upgrade would stay with Canon? That’s a brave move at best, but very foolish. You’ve alienated people and their current kit is their only connection to Canon. Some may be foolish enough to upgrade, but I see a lot of people deciding to show Canon where they can stick their suggestions and swap to another brand. Especially as this is their only connection to Canon. And I can see a lot of those other brands falling over themselves to offer trade ins and marketing to those people who have just been abandoned by Canon.

People who may have some m glass but supplement it with ef-s or ef lenses. More difficult decisions. Canon knows they will not buy any rf glass and they’re not expanding the ef or ef-s range, but there is still chance of them buying more ef and ef-s glass or m glass, and future bodies. If Canon wants them to move, offer a trade in to move to R system and see how many take it up. Or do a survey and see if they would, except that would also get out to the media if they did. So maybe just when they announce the death, they offer a free rf-ef converter and a trade in to a new APS-C R body. This same body could attract the mid range DSLR users.

To me, for this second camp, I would have not ever introduced the m6 ii last year. And I don’t think Canon makes these sorts of decisions on a yearly basis. Adjust plans? Sure. But I think when they released the m6 ii they already had the next 2-3 years mapped out. If you want to kill a line, stop developing bodies. If you want to encourage the enthusiast to move, only develop the entry level and midrange bodies.

I think worst case might be the latter. They stop developing higher end m bodies, but not the entry and mid level stuff for vloggers. They can point to the m6 ii as their best enthusiast model but then see how many of those move to an r based aps-c. No need to kill the line.

I understand that many people find the M too small, but I would suggest that smaller bodies appeal more to women - and they’re more discreet and easy to carry. Plus vloggers who do it on the move I think are less likely to be happy with an r and an rf lens. You’re hand holding these and lighter / compact is better.

Me personally, I think i would either buy a second m6 ii and keep the system for the life of it, with all the new lenses i just bought, or I would sell the lot and go Fuji. I’d keep my r5 and all that ecosystem as I’ve long accepted they are separate bar the ef lenses. But I would also inform Canon direct at my disappointment.

I'd be interested to know how much of total EOS M series sales are to vloggers in N. America/W. Europe? Maybe 1%? Vloggers in the West aren't who are making the EOS M series the best selling ILC system in the world. Single camera owners in Asia and the Pacific rim are.

 

[Michael Clark]

1) pan cake lens
2) if sigma and sony ( upcoming A7c ) can do small ff bodies so can canon...

Sony's e-mount (46.1mm) throat is no larger in diameter than the EOS M mount (47mm). Canon's (54mm) and Nikon's (55mm) FF ILC mount throat diameters are considerably larger. That gives design possibilities to Canon and Nikon that Sony simply does not have, particularly for large aperture wide angle lenses.

 

[Michael Clark]

IMO it would make sense to kill APSC system completely and focus on FF R cameras only. FF sensors can be cheap and fast with current technology so there’s no need for smaller sensors.
The task for Canon is to create a low end FF camera that is as cheap as APSC cameras but doesn’t cannibalize higher models; and create cheap FF lenses for that. For example a FF 28-90mm f/9 would be as compact as 18-55 f/5.6 for APSC, providing equal results (angle, DOF, noise performance).

It would allow much smoother transition for beginners to move towards high end cameras and lenses. It seems like the DSLR way brings more money to manufacturers (buy APSC first and then spend your money again for FF cameras and lenses) but in many cases it holds people back because the transition is a pain therefore it takes a decade for some people to move to FF.

Most current EOS M buyers, or Fuji APS-C buyers, for that matter, are not the kind of buyer that plans to transition to anything anytime soon. They've already bought the only camera they want for the foreseeable future.

 

[Michael Clark]

It's an interesting rumor. What I noticed, and this has been going on long before the rumor was published on Canon Rumors, is that one of the major camera suppliers in the Netherlands now sells a lot of EF-M occasion lenses. A large part of this comes from their own stock (demo models). This includes lenses such as the 11-22, the 22 and the 28 macro. These are lenses that you hardly ever see offered as an occasion. And they sell quite a few. Usually only at 15-45 or 55-200 lenses are offered. It seems they have received a signal to empty their supply.
As you can see here: https://www.kamera-express.nl/produ...ideo/tweedehands-lenzen#?tags=738,1367&page=1

What is an "occasion" lens?

 

[Michael Clark]

EF-M lenses have a diameter of 60.9mm, which is already larger than the RF mount's throat diameter. The RF mount's throat diameter is 10mm larger than EOS-M, and its flange distance is 2mm longer.

So my impression is Canon can switch to RF mount, make lenses the same size, and the body just a wee bit larger.

They're anywhere from 60.8mm to 61.2mm, but who's measuring?

 

[Michael Clark]

Don’t understand why Canon ever made the M cameras

To sell cameras and make money. And they have.

 

[Michael Clark]

They could downsize the R5 sensor to make a 17mp aps-c sensor for an R7 I guess ?

More likely to use the 32 MP APS-C sensor from the 90D/M6 Mark II, or a 32MP APS-C version of the possible 80MP or so R5s.

 

[koenkooi]

What is an "occasion" lens?

It's the stupid dutch idiom for 'used'. It always trips me up, since everything related to my day job is in English, so going outside and seeing English words misused gives me a big enough mental stutter to bring it into 'pet peeve' territory.
'Occasion' used to be only for used cars, but it seems the stupidity has spread beyond that.

 

[-pekr-]

If I could afford it I’d buy the R5 which is the best wildlife camera ever made but second best for me is a aps-c R7 with a downsized 17mp R5 sensor to give more reach (like the R5 has in crop mode) but a bit more affordable

I am no expert in sensor production. Just wonder how "downsized" R5 (whatever it means) sensor would make it cheaper? A smaller die, so less expensive? If such an APS-C camera should have IBIS, identical AF capabilities, etc., and the only difference would be the sensor, how much cheaper would it be in comparison to FF models?

Maybe an era of APS-C models, as we know them, is mostly over, apart from special purpose line, like OES-M is? And for reach, there could be some high-resolution R model, using a crop mode? But that would be expensive again. But anyway - there is no upgrade path to all those DSLR APS-C guys, who want better ergonomics (I mean larger body here) than EOS-M provides.

 

[Franklyok]

Sony's e-mount (46.1mm) throat is no larger in diameter than the EOS M mount (47mm). Canon's (54mm) and Nikon's (55mm) FF ILC mount throat diameters are considerably larger. That gives design possibilities to Canon and Nikon that Sony simply does not have, particularly for large aperture wide angle lenses.

So . EOS M replacemant RF-S with utrawide could be possible.

How are RF-S pancake lens with elements backwards "into mount" excluded? Canon has mentioned before, that it is willing to put elements "backwards, into mount".

 

[candyman]

What is an "occasion" lens?

Sorry, English is not my native language. I thought occasion is the proper translation. By occasion I mean: used/2nd hand/demo model.