It looks like 2021 will be the last year for the EOS M lineup [CR2]

[Bob Howland]

Would it be possible for a Canon to make a camera body, about the same size as the RP, with interchangeable mounts, both R and M? Would anybody care to make a guess how much such a feature would add to the price of the body?

 

[Bob Howland]

How would that work withought an adapter? I hope they could make an adapter that moves the smaller lenses 2mm into the mount, but I honestly don't know if they can.

Interchangeable mount?

 

[woodman411]

It doesn't matter how small they make an APS-C RF mount body if the lenses don't get correspondingly smaller. I do not see how that works by just making only full frame lenses. The only way this makes any kind of sense is if we get lenses that are comparable in size and price to EF-M lenses. If it's Canons intent to move away from the very small and light camera system, I disagree wholeheartedly with this strategy.

It's not as bad as it seems:


Left: M50II + EFM 32 f/1.4 ($699 + $479 = $1178) | Right: RP + RF 50 f/1.8 ($999 + $199 = $1198) (recent RP refurbished deal was at $687)

Look carefully at the above and tell me if the size and price differences are worth dedicating an entire system for.

 

[Richard CR]

meh. I'll believe it when i see it. the idea that canon has to drop mount to consolidate or to save resources is a little fictitious. Canon has always believed they will create a camera body to meet demand, regardless of the camera. That mentality hasn't changed much in the last 2 years - ergo an EOS Ra.

if Canon is coming out with no APS-C lenses, then a low cost APS-C model in terms of the RF mount is completely and utterly DOA. the idea that a full frame UWA of 18-45 is going to dually handle both is far fetched. anyone see the size of the 15-45mm EF-M lately? or the Z APS-C kit lens?

also, there are millions of M's out there - to drop the mount with no ability to move to the RF mount alienates users and they can all easily decide to switch to an APS-C camera that actually has APS-C lenses made for it. which most would.

I mean, i get the fact that Canon is probably NOT putting resources on the M, but to actively kill it? no, sorry. Canon's not this stupid.

 

[Richard CR]

It's not as bad as it seems:

View attachment 194892
Left: M50II + EFM 32 f/1.4 ($699 + $479 = $1178) | Right: RP + RF 50 f/1.8 ($999 + $199 = $1198) (recent RP refurbished deal was at $687)

except one small point.

the 32mm F1.4 can outresolve the 32MP APS-C sensor, and is sharp wide open corner to corner. which is the equivalent of 80MP on full frame.

The 50mm F.18? not so much.

 

[woodman411]

except one small point.

the 32mm F1.4 can outresolve the 32MP APS-C sensor, and is sharp wide open corner to corner. which is the equivalent of 80MP on full frame.

The 50mm F.18? not so much.

Agreed. I am curious whether some would lean towards crop with the better lens, or RP with full frame IQ and better ergonomics, but size and price would be a negligible factor in this comparison, which is kind of the point.

 

[LensFungus]

I wouldn't doubt the possibility of upcoming small and cheap RF lenses for an APS-C R camera because I'm quite certain we all are swimming in the same pond of f/11 and f/7.1 RF lenses Canon has provided us with.

 

[dwarven]

also, there are millions of M's out there - to drop the mount with no ability to move to the RF mount alienates users and they can all easily decide to switch to an APS-C camera that actually has APS-C lenses made for it. which most would.

I mean, i get the fact that Canon is probably NOT putting resources on the M, but to actively kill it? no, sorry. Canon's not this stupid.

Companies leave legacy users in the dust all the time, and Canon's crystal ball can see further into the future than we can. Canon does not use the "Amazon top seller" financial model when deciding which products to put R&D into. I bet their analysis heavily considers statistical trends, not just what is currently valuable. Their model is likely seeing a downwards trend in the M mount and a consistent upwards trend in the R mount. This is probably based on months or years worth of data.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The "M" likely would need to grow to fit IBIS into it so if that happens, why not increase the mount diameter by 4mm and make it into a RP? It might need a 4mm taller and wider body but I expect less than that. It will get thicker to fit IBIS, but with a small sensor, a smaller IBIS unit will be designed.

The bigger issue is being able to adapt "M" lenses. a adaptor with optics is possible, but not very practical considering that "M" lenses are consumer grade and not like a very expensive "L" lens.

 

[jvillain]

Both sources were also adamant that there will not be RF-S lenses for APS-C EOS R cameras, but that future lens design will “fill the void of no dedicated APS-C lenses”.

Same people that originally said there would never be an RF APS-C camera?

If they bring the APS-C bodies some third party will bring the lenses. If Canon see's they are leaving money on the table they will start creating lenses. As for me I already have the glass I just need the bodies so this is good news for me, but I do feel for those who bought into the M system as I went through the same thing when Canon first announced they were killing DSLR APS-C and APS-C owners could go pound sand because there would never be an APS-C RF mirrorless.

 

[Ozarker]

The M50 is still the best selling mirrorless camera on Amazon, will they really kill this cash cow? If they will go for it they have to release a 600-700$ RF camera, or this slice of the market will go to the competition

Well, we really don't know what the margins are for the M series, so it isn't necessarily a "cash cow". Canon seems to believe there is more cash to be made through ASP-C R cameras. Canon is trading one cow for a better cow, maybe? Might not can afford to feed both.

 

[josephandrews222]

Agreed. I am curious whether some would lean towards crop with the better lens, or RP with full frame IQ and better ergonomics, but size and price would be a negligible factor in this comparison, which is kind of the point.

One (wood)man's (!) ergonomics are another man's...something or other (no snark intended).

I have posted dozens of images on the CR forums (mostly birds). My trusty 5DMkIII/100-400 II combination is the source of most of these images. I also dabble in acquiring images for times of astronomical significance (eclipses [total eclipses are really cool]) and the recent Jupiter/Saturn convergence come to mind)...where Canon's teleconverters are quite useful...again with the 5DMkIII...where the ergonomics of the large 5D-sized body are of paramount import.

I look forward to purchasing an R5 in the next few months.

But...

...while I have sold a few photos, most of my photo/video efforts are not of the commercial variety...and our family's photos (31K posted online and counting) are important to all of us...and I love the hobby.

A large percentage (half perhaps!?) of our best and most cherished photos center on our family outings and vacations and concerts and sports.

And starting with Canon's S90 (then S95) and moving to Canon's M series...Canon's larger bodies...while STILL OF IMPORT...aren't my go-to for family photos.

And the M2 (which I purchased from a shop in Canada during that time interval when Canon USA said 'no' to the M) and M10...(and I presume the M100 and M200)...are tiny when mated to the 22mm f2 lens...which my daughters utilized extensively when traveling Europe half-a-decade ago.

The M6MkII is a wonderful piece of technology...and it, along with the M6...when connected to the EF-M 11-22...is really really good at what it does...and is really tiny...so tiny (and low mass) that flimsy consumer camcorder tripods are sufficient when we all want to be in the picture at Disney's Epcot Center.

So for many of our uses, the ergonomic argument tilts heavily in favor of the M series of Canon products.

To circle back--in these pandemic days (no traveling)...I've been utilizing the 5KMkIII much more than the EF-M bodies.

But is simply unfathomable to me that Canon will put a stop to the EF-M series...and I really would like to see M-format sales figures from countries other than the USA.

My two cents.

Thanks for reading.

 

[Sathaless]

I love the idea of cheaper lenses that are meant for APS-C, but will also work on a full frame body. Having two mirrorless mounts is way too disjointed when their competitors all have one mount. And all those people buying the M50 will just buy the R mount equivalent now. It seems like a perfect time to bring in their now legendary Rebel product line.

Just relax. You know you're all going to get one

No we won't. If they kill off the EF-M line, its just more fuel to go to Fuji or Sony.

 

[BakaBokeh]

It's not as bad as it seems:

View attachment 194892
Left: M50II + EFM 32 f/1.4 ($699 + $479 = $1178) | Right: RP + RF 50 f/1.8 ($999 + $199 = $1198) (recent RP refurbished deal was at $687)

Look carefully at the above and tell me if the size and price differences are worth dedicating an entire system for.

Yes I still believe so. That's a very specific case. A more appropriate comparison would be the larger RF 35mm which would at least give the same field of view on whatever future APS-C RF body is supposed to come out. When the lens gets longer for telephoto or UWA, that girth adds up. At least for me it's very noticeable.

 

[adrian_bacon]

Every RF body automatically goes into crop mode when you attach an EF-S lens. all Canon needs to do is release RF versions of their EF-m lenses with maybe a slightly bigger image circle so IBIS has some breathing room.put one of those lenses on a full frame camera and you get APS-C, because the lens would communicate its image circle size to the camera. No problem.

the only real hiccup is how to differentiate such a difference to a consumer In a way that’s not confusing.

 

[Richard CR]

Companies leave legacy users in the dust all the time, and Canon's crystal ball can see further into the future than we can. Canon does not use the "Amazon top seller" financial model when deciding which products to put R&D into. I bet their analysis heavily considers statistical trends, not just what is currently valuable. Their model is likely seeing a downwards trend in the M mount and a consistent upwards trend in the R mount. This is probably based on months or years worth of data.

umm no.

there's not a company out there that goes to their board.. "We're dumping our best selling camera (M50) and its entire line, and not giving them an alternative, and thus most of those users will go to other brands".

we're also a) not talking legacy b) talking R&D expenditures.

Killing a sucessful product line, and NOT offering an alternative to people to switch to is ... blindingly stupid.

 

[SteveC]

I mean, i get the fact that Canon is probably NOT putting resources on the M, but to actively kill it? no, sorry. Canon's not this stupid.

That's a key distinction. Continue to sell it without developing new lenses, is to some people tantamount to "killing" it. Especially to gearheads (I resemble that remark, sometimes!) who want something new. (Look at all of those who talk about this mount being "dead" simply because Canon isn't throwing more lenses out there.)

But your EF-M camera and lenses don't disappear when this happens, and Canon could continue selling them for another ten years. They won't get worse, and the target market mostly won't care. And the M6-II will still be vastly superior to any Rebel (four digit true model number) made for years, and likely even the three digit models for a couple of years (assuming of course they go down that EF-S Rebel path or even a similar APS-C "cheap" RF path).

Actually discontinuing production, on the other hand, would be "killing" it by anyone's definition of the term. The rumor simply says "2021 will be the last year of the lineup..." but what does that actually mean in terms of being able to buy one of the existing models at retail?

 

[Eagle Eye]

How would that work withought an adapter?

Magic. Or 21st century engineering.

 

[Richard CR]

I love the idea of cheaper lenses that are meant for APS-C, but will also work on a full frame body.

sorry it's an idiotic idea.

they will;

a) never be as small as the competition, nor as cheap
b) if they manage a) then they will be optically compromised on full frame anyways, making them full frame lenses in name only.

I mean, you simply can't cheat things here. they have to project a much larger image circle than the competition's lenses. it's simply not going to work.

Look at the Nikkor 18-35mm it's $750. Canon will have to create this same lens, but for $199.

How's that going to work out?

 

[Richard CR]

That's a key distinction. Continue to sell it without developing new lenses, is to some people tantamount to "killing" it. (Look at all of those who talk about this mount being "dead" simply because Canon isn't throwing more lenses out there.) But your EF-M camera and lenses don't disappear when this happens, and Canon could continue selling them for another ten years. They won't get worse, and the target market mostly won't care. And the M6-II will still be vastly superior to any Rebel (four digit true model number) made for years, and likely even the three digit models for a couple of years (assuming of course they go down that path).

Actually discontinuing production, on the other hand, would be "killing" it by anyone's definition of the term. The rumor simply says "2021 will be the last year of the lineup..." but what does that actually mean in terms of being able to buy one of the existing models at retail?

that means to me, that they discontinue and it goes into EOL.
which is why i'm stating it's stupid and probably not happening.
not with what is being proposed as a replacement anyway.

If the rumor stated;

Canon is discontinuing the EOS-M. According to sources Canon will be transitioning the EF-M lenses to the RF mount (calling it RF-M) and offering a trade-in program for EF-M lenses to the new RF-M lenses. They will create two new camera bodies, and EOS-M will officially die in 2021."

Then I'd be creating an "it's OVER. Long live the EOS-M" post right now on my own site. And happily get ready to purchase a new APS-C RF camera next year to go with my R5s.

but saying. we're discontinuing the EOS-M it's over. no more past 2021, and as well, well sorry if you liked the small, cheap and good lenses that were part of that system, you're screwed now..

does not wash.