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

[Woody]

The EOS-M cameras are the bestselling cameras across the globe right now. There are hungry predators lurking in the corners, waiting for Canon to give up their envious pole position and ready to pounce any minute. I am not entirely convinced about the veracity of these rumors. Were the rumors started by these hungry predators?

 

[reefroamer]

The EOS-M cameras are the bestselling cameras across the globe right now. There are hungry predators lurking in the corners, waiting for Canon to give up their envious pole position and ready to pounce any minute. I am not entirely convinced about the veracity of these rumors. Were the rumors started by these hungry predators?

Actually, I think the bestselling cameras across the globe right now are built into smartphones.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I disagree with almost every sentence. 500/4 on a Rebel?? I don't think so. People who buy 500/4 do not use Rebel. 7D2 maybe, but even that is kind of obsolete now. R5 takes 45MP@20FPS, pretty much kills 7D2 (20MP@10FPS). Even R6 (20MP@20FPS) and R (30MP@8FPS) are competitive.
Sport photographers using all the huge white lenses use 1D series with just 20MP and still often crop a considerable amount. Current and upcoming FF cameras have reached the point where there's no gap to be filled by 7D series. In 2014 the 7D2 made a difference. Today, it (or it's equivalent around 33MP@20FPS) would not.
Also do not forget, APS-C might help on the long end, but has lot's of drawbacks (short end, noise, bokeh, etc.), it has always been a compromise ever since the birth of APS-C. We do not use it because it is good for photography, just for economic considerations.

But I think you didn't get the whole point. When using FF lenses on an APS-C body, you pay for and carry the weight of lenses which were designed to produce images on more than 2.5X(!!) size sensors. And you consider it to be totally OK. Anything but. Purchasing and carrying a line of FF L lenses and then pairing them with some cheap APS-C body which will not even really lighten the overall weight of the setup makes no sense to me. Yes there were times....I did it as well...early 2000s starting with 6MP 60D when there were no FF alternatives. The world has changed at 5D2 and now again at R5.
I think we kind of arrived where APS-C is paired with non-L glass and FF with L glass. Mixing APS-C and L glass is pretty much over. Possible but no point really.
Ah yes, and APS-C body is not even going to be effectively smaller than an RP.

The only thing that could make a huge difference if there were professional-grade APS-C lenses (70-200/2.8, 100-500, etc.). That has never happened and never will.

I don't agree with almost anything you say. There are many photographers who can barely afford a used 500 F4 or new 100-400 or similar lens and then use it on an APS-C body. And yes, i've seen even used on a Rebel. Because the image quality of a Rebel is just as good as a 7D's. I'm pretty happy to use an 80D or 90D with any supertele.

Now mount a 100-400 on a 90D and then the same 100-400 on a R6. Then compare the final images at same equivalent 640mm - 32MP vs 8MP.
Then compare the prices. Almost $5000 for the R6 combo vs $3500 for the 90D.

Not everyone has money for $4000 R5, no matter how good you can crop it. Especially in less developed countries where even $1000 is a lot of money for a camera. People rather pay for a 24-30 MP APS-C camera than a R6 with 20MP which then you can crop it to 8MP.

A 7D is bargain compared to R5 or R6 and even R. A brand new RF 7D would be the price of a R6 or slightly less with much higher pixel density (reach).

"When using FF lenses on an APS-C body, you pay for and carry the weight of lenses which were designed to produce images on more than 2.5X(!!) size sensors"

That's not true either. A 100-400 or 500 F4 made for APS-C would not be any smaller than one for FF. Just check Fuji's 100-400 or 200mm.

I'm sorry but FF is not there yet. It will be there when a 50MP R5-like camera will be $2000. Until then we need affordable and fast APS-C.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I have NEVER in 40 years bought a body or glass and wanted/needed an update but I shoot stills only but yeah, video folx need that shit I guess. Bummer if you do, lol. Try again

So what you do with your lenses when the newest camera you can mount them on is 10+ years old? Yes, some people shoot video too and prefer to buy equipment new. Try again...

 

[Etienne]

I have the following M lenses: Canon 11-22 IS, Rokinon 12mm f/2, Canon 22mm f/2, and Canon 32mm f/1.4
These lenses produce great results, are small and lightweight and inexpensive.
There is no equivalent set of lenses for an APS-C system today. These lenses deserve a top notch body.
This system makes an excellent travel package, and the results rival my 5D3 system at a fraction of the cost and weight.

I am very disappointed that Canon never delivered the body that these excellent little lenses deserve.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I am amazed at the number of people who keep saying there is no upgrade path from M to R like there was from EF-s to EF. Do these folks not know that EF-s lenses do not work on EF cameras? The only upgrade path that existed was if you had and EF-s camera and bought FF lenses, you could then use them on a FF camera. Other than the 7D II crowd, that list is very short. If Canon is really going to kill M, then they need to come up with an adapter that has some retrofocus glass in it to increase the backthrow so the M lenses can be used on an APS-C R.

Yes, people used lenses like 100-400 on 7D and similar cameras. Because they couldn't or did not wanted to buy a $6000 1DX which can shoot 10 frames per second. Also wanted more than 5 pixels on a bird.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Harsh? The try again part? I could coddle the poster and ask them to rethink their position but these are big kids here and when they come out with GAS related responses I just have to be frank.

And you are the big and mature person who thinks his opinion is the only valid. That someone happy not having an option to buy a camera in 5 years time when the current camera breaks / gets stolen / wants a backup / wants an upgrade.

 

[Chig]

I have the following M lenses: Canon 11-22 IS, Rokinon 12mm f/2, Canon 22mm f/2, and Canon 32mm f/1.4
These lenses produce great results, are small and lightweight and inexpensive.
There is no equivalent set of lenses for an APS-C system today. These lenses deserve a top notch body.
This system makes an excellent travel package, and the results rival my 5D3 system at a fraction of the cost and weight.

I am very disappointed that Canon never delivered the body that these excellent little lenses deserve.

What body do you have and have you tried the M6 mark ii ?

 

[EOS 4 Life]

In 2022 2021 will be the last year and 2023 will be the next year.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

While that is officially the case, Canon pushes sales by offering better prices and probably incentives for sellers to push the newer ones. That usually seals the fate of the older one. EF lenses and DSLR cameras are a example. Sales are dropping as buyers move to the R series bodies and lenses. It may take years, but the low price of the R and RF bodies had the desired effect, then, the specs of the R5 / R6 and better IQ RF lenses pushed a lot more into buying. It will be several years before EF lenses stop selling, but buyers are being nudged toward RF.


The same could happen with a "M" replacement, a new and even smaller RF body with a low price. That's been rumored. Then the sales gives Canon the reason to move to the newer model. It will take years, of course.

EF lenses are far cheaper and Canon recently dropped the prices on a lot of DSLR cameras.
I am not convinced those are going away either.
Canon stated that they would keep making EF-M Mount cameras as long as they are in demand and that if there was big enough demand there would be new EF lenses.
Canon made new EF, EF-S, and EF-M cameras in 2020.
There just were not any new lenses.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Mostly just to give future buyers the opportunity to mix and match between APSC and FF. This group might be too small though.

They can already do that will a speed booster.
Unlike the RF-mount there are only third-party ones but they are still pretty popular.
All of those very lenses can be adapted to full-frame RF mount cameras.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Canon should give us a better (sharper) EF-M 15-45 lens. It is much easier than develope a APS_C R mount camera.

How so?
Canon only needs to put an existing sensor into an existing body.
Just put a 7D sensor in an R6 body and be done with it.
If it is a new sensor that putting it in an RF mount body should not be any more of a challenge than putting it into an EF-M mount body.

 

[SteveC]

I don't agree with almost anything you say. There are many photographers who can barely afford a used 500 F4 or new 100-400 or similar lens and then use it on an APS-C body. And yes, i've seen even used on a Rebel. Because the image quality of a Rebel is just as good as a 7D's. I'm pretty happy to use an 80D or 90D with any supertele.

Now mount a 100-400 on a 90D and then the same 100-400 on a R6. Then compare the final images at same equivalent 640mm - 32MP vs 8MP.
Then compare the prices. Almost $5000 for the R6 combo vs $3500 for the 90D.

I had a 100-400 on an M6-II at the San Diego zoo once. Not even a Rebel, but an M series camera!

 

[PeterT]

XF16-55mm f2.8 with 655g and ø83.3mm x 106.0mm for about $ 950
vs EF-M 15-45 f3.5-6.3 IS STM with 130g ø60.9mm x 44.5mm for $ 275
or
XF55-200mmF3.5-4.8 R LM OIS 580g and 118mm for $ 640
vs. EF-M 55-200 4.5-6.3 IS STM 260g and 86mm for $ 250

Sorry, but you are not comparing apples to apples. You compare dark plastic M-lenses (i added f numbers of the first couple of lenses in red italic to your text) to premium (16-55) or mid-range (55-200) Fuji ones. While Fuji also has a plastic cheap line - the XC lenses:

XC 15-45mm F3,5-5,6 OIS PZ with 136g and ø63mm x 44mm for about $ 300 (price from dpreview)
or
XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS II with 195g and ø63mm x 65mm for about $ 250 (ebay.us)
vs EF-M 15-45 f3.5-6.3 IS STM with 130g ø60.9mm x 44.5mm for $ 275

or

XC 50-230mm F4.5-6.7 OIS II with 375g and ø70mm x 111mm for about $ 399 (dpreview)
vs. EF-M 55-200 4.5-6.3 IS STM 260g and 86mm for $ 250

Isn't now the comparison quite different?

 

[allanP]

Sorry, but you are not comparing apples to apples. You compare dark plastic M-lenses (i added f numbers of the first couple of lenses in red italic to your text) to premium (16-55) or mid-range (55-200) Fuji ones. While Fuji also has a plastic cheap line - the XC lenses:

XC 15-45mm F3,5-5,6 OIS PZ with 136g and ø63mm x 44mm for about $ 300 (price from dpreview)
or
XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS II with 195g and ø63mm x 65mm for about $ 250 (ebay.us)
vs EF-M 15-45 f3.5-6.3 IS STM with 130g ø60.9mm x 44.5mm for $ 275

or

XC 50-230mm F4.5-6.7 OIS II with 375g and ø70mm x 111mm for about $ 399 (dpreview)
vs. EF-M 55-200 4.5-6.3 IS STM 260g and 86mm for $ 250

Isn't now the comparison quite different?

Ok, I am not at home in the Fuji system, so for my comparison I used what my friends have for Fuji cameras. I am also not familiar with the distinction to XC series. I only see what my friends use and what I have for M System (I have 22 f/2, 32mm f/1.4, and others too). The picture results from my plastic fantastic are definitely comparable with those from Fuji with premium optics.
Although, as I have already written before, I use M almost only for travel

 

[Etienne]

What body do you have and have you tried the M6 mark ii ?

I have owned three M bodies: the original, the M3 and the M6.
I'd like a body with top notch DPAF, IBIS, and an excellent video implementation in the M5 format with an excellent viewfinder and swivel screen.
I'd be willing to pay top dollar, because I love the little compact lenses.
I don't think that's too much to ask, but it looks extremely unlikely at this point.

 

[Surab]

They can already do that will a speed booster.
Unlike the RF-mount there are only third-party ones but they are still pretty popular.
All of those very lenses can be adapted to full-frame RF mount cameras.

Are we talking about EF glass? I'm talking about RF, some people would like proper interoperability between the FF and APSC line without adapters.

 

[Deleted member 387121]

I have NEVER in 40 years bought a body or glass and wanted/needed an update but I shoot stills only but yeah, video folx need that shit I guess. Bummer if you do, lol. Try again

Why are some people so callous toward those whose needs are different from their own?

40 years ago--and I bought my first Canon SLR 39 years ago--a camera was little more than a light-tight box with some exposure controls. Other than lenses, the main "technology" driving image quality was film. Advances in film, such as grain structure, color balance (not necessarily accuracy), and exposure latitude, provided regular "upgrades" for all cameras, from the highest end professional SLR to the cheapest plastic-lens point and shoot. With a decent set of lenses, it was reasonable to expect to hold onto a well-built SLR body for a decade or more.

A modern digital camera, on the other hand, is a high-tech electronic product, pure and simple, and electronics advances quickly. I agree that most people don't buy a camera specifically intending to get rid of it in a few years, but eventually people want to. My ex still has the EOS 20D we bought in 2004. Other than needing a new battery, I'm sure it works just as well as it did when it was new, with its 8 MP sensor, 9 AF points, and a 1.8" rear LCD display (which was big for its time). But technology marches on: higher resolutions, faster/more accurate autofocus, increased dynamic range, video, and even "convenience" features like WiFi and big, articulated, high resolution LCD screens, together make compelling reasons for many people to upgrade periodically.

 

[JohnC]

I like the small size of the M series. Of course having said that I buy an M6II and mount this on it:

https://www.smallrig.com/smallrig-l-bracket-for-canon-eos-m6-mark-ii-lcc2516.html ... without using the vertical plate

While still smaller it is extremely comfortable in the hand, and is works much better when mounting larger lenses (180 macro, 100-400 II) etc.

If the rumor is true I hate to see it go, as I would have definitely picked up an M5II if they came out with one with the 32mp sensor. I've enjoyed the M6II immensely and it became my most used body pretty quickly. I did invest in a couple of the Sigma primes (56 and 30), 22mm prime, the 11-22, and the 55-200. The latter two are used primarily for travel while the former or adapted lenses are used locally. I keep that kit with me at nearly all times.

Frankly, the M series convinced me on the MILC direction and I will get the R5s when it comes out. I still use my 5dIV but it only comes out when I'm doing landscape. I tried Fuji and for me it didn't work, although they have very nice products.

 

[slclick]

So what you do with your lenses when the newest camera you can mount them on is 10+ years old? Yes, some people shoot video too and prefer to buy equipment new. Try again...

You use them.