A higher end EOS M body is in the pipeline [CR1]

[SteveC]

That’s good. It shows that Canon has a line that’s popular enough to continue advancing. It’s very likely that it’s the reason they’re defying everyone

FULL STOP.

Everyone? Speak for yourself, please.

 

[Etienne]

Excellent News.
I wonder if Canon will make an R - M lens adapter. It should be doable since the M Flange focal distance is 18mm, and the R is 20mm.
My guess is that they will make one soon.

 

[mb66energy]

Reminder: As long as the official adapters exist, EF / EF-S lenses are viable options for both mounts. This alone increases the ecosystem ten fold, even while the native options are still slim.

That's true. While I would like some EF-M f/4.0 20-60 IS with 1:2 reproduction ratio @ 60mm and "close EF-M 32 image quality" in a compact built @ 700 EUR/$ as a very flexible "universal lens" I really appreciate the compatibility of my M50 with the EF-S 60 and the EF 70-200 IS which both give high class IQ. And with a high IQ constant f/4 70-200 zoom the zoom lens dominates the size.

And if you go out with a M50, two EF(-S) lenses and two EF-M lenses ... buy two EF2EF-M adapters to have all lenses fitted with EF-M mount. Same goes for the R system: If you use e.g. two bodies, two RF lenses and two EF lenses like 14-24 and 2.8 200 buying two EF2R adapters isn't the dominating factor in terms of money!

 

[mb66energy]

Excellent News.
I wonder if Canon will make an R - M lens adapter. It should be doable since the M Flange distance is 18mm, and the R is 20mm.
My guess is that they will make one soon.

It isn't that easy - the difference of flange distance is very tiny, around 2mm and routing of the electrical data has to be done too not compromising the strength of the adapter for e.g. a 28-70 2.0.

But I thought ~ two days ago about some patent with a "shiftable" mount. Maybe an EF-M mount which can be retracted by 3mm to make a 5mm thick RF2EF-M adapter possible? 3mm travel seems possible.

Just checked it:
18 mm EF-M flange distance
20 mm RF f.d.
difference is 2mm mentioned above

 

[jedy]

Not sure how this new EOS-M can be a 7D replacement. With a totally different lens mount there are no high end lenses to use with it other than the less than ideal option of adapting EF lenses. Besides this camera is simply ‘higher end’ and no indication it’s 7D level higher end. I’d say FF with a crop mode will take care of real high end crop duties.

 

[Andy Westwood]

I think Canon has this right R = FF and M = APS-C I know we cannot swap lens from R to M, but we have fantastic adaptors meaning we can use all EF glass on both R and M bodies. Admittedly I am not a massive fan on adapting lenses, but it does give us great flexibility if needs must.

I no longer have an EF mount camera body, but I have kept some of my EF glass as I don’t mind adapting lenses I only use occasionally.

Wrongly or rightly but let’s face it DSLR’s are coming to the end of their life span. The 5D and 6D look like being replaced with R5’s and R6’s, however this does leave a gap for likes of the 90D and much loved 7D so this could be Canon filling this gap with a chunkier better build M Series body, this could work!

So, the M Series bodies could become remarkably diverse from the tiny compact M200 up to a much bigger M7 and all the other combination of bodies we currently enjoy such as the M50 M6 and M5.

This could mean for some users having M glass for casual everyday use and for certain types of more specialist tasks such as sports photography popping on an adaptor and taking advantage of all that fantastic but fast becoming redundant EF glass.

I for one, could live with adapting my EF 70-200 2.8 on a chunkier M body especially if that body had IBIS, lightning fast AF tracking and could shoot 14-16 FPS.

 

[ildyria]

even the most basic of EF/EF-s lenses with an adapter on the M5 make it pretty much an ergonomic nightmare

my hands are in no way big but putting something like the 15-85 makes the camera unholdable with the small grip and my pinky left hanging

the 60 macro is ok but if i add any flash it's again too much for the small grip

the 55-250 STM on the other hand handles beautifully

I totally disagree with the ergonomic nightmare (and I have long fingers).


Me with my m50 + viltrox speedbooster + EF 70-200 f/2.8. The trick is that I carry and balance all the weight with my left arm.

I never really understood this complain of front heavy, I actually found the 5D series etc back heavy...

The speedbooster (x0.71) basically converts my m50 in a FF camera (no kidding). That is my opinion is the biggest advantage of the EF-m mount over the EF-s.

 

[Del Paso]

I just can't imagine Canon raising the bar for APS cameras (M6 II, M5 II) without producing some new high-quality lenses.
Presently, we only need to wait a little more...for the EF-M 32 f1,4 siblings !

 

[maniacalrobot]

It will be interesting to see how canon distinguish a new “prosumer” M body with the “consumer” RP. I think a good approach would be to make a flagship M a fashion statement. Get some exposed metal and leather, and beat the fuji xt series for looks

 

[Kit.]

For people wondering if this would be a 7D II replacement.....

Where are the native lenses that would support such a camera?

100-400L II will be the default lens on such a camera for quite a lot of people.

Yeah sure no argument adapted lenses just work. But as Canon well knows, 7D's sold a LOT of top end glass. And that's why it wont happen on the M-mount.

Why?

 

[Kit.]

It will be interesting to see how canon distinguish a new “prosumer” M body with the “consumer” RP. I think a good approach would be to make a flagship M a fashion statement. Get some exposed metal and leather, and beat the fuji xt series for looks

"Prosumer" means "consumer that produces".

"Consumer that uses the camera as a fashion statement" is something else.

 

[Cat_Interceptor]

Why?

Where's the actual L quality glass for mirrorless esp at the lengths the 7D II was so good with? It's all RF. A prosumer 7D followup makes far more sense with the mount that has the top line glass.

 

[jedy]

100-400L II will be the default lens on such a camera for quite a lot of people.

The lens you mention isn’t a native EOS-M lens. It’ll have to be adapted. I still think FF R cameras with a crop mode will take over any pro crop duties. Seems pointless having a dedicated crop R camera with current mirrorless technology. Also, I can’t imagine a pro photographer carrying a high end M with adapted EF lenses and FF R with RF lenses. With DSLR, the advantage having a 7D and 5D/1D using the same lenses made much more sense.

 

[Kit.]

Where's the actual L quality glass for mirrorless esp at the lengths the 7D II was so good with? It's all RF.

Oh, really?

Ship me all that worthless L glass that you used with 7D II. I'll find a proper way to dispose it.

The lens you mention isn’t a native EOS-M lens. It’ll have to be adapted.

You sound like somebody who would refuse to use this lens on 7D II because it "isn't an EF-S lens".

I still think FF R cameras with a crop mode will take over any pro crop duties.

Maybe. But they won't cost like a 7D II for quite a long time.

 

[docsmith]

Interesting, what do you like about the M6II over the 5DIV?

I also own the 5DIV and M6II. The obvious advantages of the M6II are size, weight, FPS, face/eye tracking in EVF, and, well, the EVF if you like them. I am actually very pleased with the IQ and how the files handle in post processing with the M6II. I see it occasionally mentioned, but that was one of the big improvements going from the 5DIII to the 5DIV, easier post processing. The M6II is actually fairly similar. Also worth pointing out, the M6II has more DR at low ISOs than the 5DIII (but not 5DIV). Battery life has been better than advertised. Perhaps it is because I used the EVF a lot, but I am ~500-600 images per battery charge.

Overall, it is a great little camera. I have really enjoyed it.

As for Cons and why I see room for a higher end M camera, but AF in servo mode needs just a bit of work, particularly with single point and spot. Zone is actually the most responsive AF option, or at least that is how it seems to me. The Eye-Face tracking is actually very good, and quicker than on the 5DIV in Liveview. Also, that pixel density. Ooof. You really need to be ~2x or higher equivalent focal length to get tact sharp images. Even with "stabilized lenses," if I pixel peep, I am seeing some pixel level blur unless I use high shutter speeds. So, IBIS should help.

 

[dcm]

Having owned both EF FF and M cameras, I never once wanted to use a large EF lens on my M camera. M is meant for those looking for small and light. It might be a mistake, but I think not. If you want two very different sized systems, you will gladly get the right lenses for each system, in my opinion.

I agree, most of the time. I have found myself using the M6II body instead of the 1DXII when I need a silent shutter while using my EF lenses, such as shooting low light in a church during the service with EF85/1.4L. The available M lenses were not up to this challenge. It’s nice the M6II can step up in that role which isn’t my normal use case for the M. I’ll be first in line for a high-end M to upgrade my M5. I expect it will get some use as a backup to my 1DXII now that I no longer have a 6D for that role.

 

[jolyonralph]

even the most basic of EF/EF-s lenses with an adapter on the M5 make it pretty much an ergonomic nightmare

Well, I wouldn't want to use a big white on one (although I did try out the EOS M3 with the original EF 400mm f/2.8 just for a laugh)

There are many lenses I find perfectly comfortable using with the M series.

The light primes. EF 40mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8 and 1.4, 85mm f1/.8
Macro lenses: EF 100mm f/2.8L IS (actually I really like this lens with the M bodies), MP-E 65 (having the lightweight body is a great benefit for macro work)
Zooms: The EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II is surprisingly easy to use with the M series cameras, whereas the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II isn't for some reason.

 

[stevelee]

It’s not a perfect camera, but my M50 is the one I grab whenever I leave the house these days; I usually have the 55-200 attached and a stack of close-up lenses handy. My 6D Mark II “Big Boy” camera gets dusted off whenever I’m on a photo mission, but the size and weight of the M camera makes it more attractive much of the time. I realize the M6 II has a few performance advantages, but that external finder makes no sense; it’s just another expensive add-on. Also, as a still photographer, I use Canon’s fully articulated screen a lot; the simpler M6 screen would do me no good. Make me a better M50 and I’ll be interested; make an RF-M adapter and I’d be really interested.

Last year before the G5X and G7X updates came out, I looked at the M50 as a possible choice for my travel camera. I was quite favorably impressed, but decided to wait for the G models and decide then. In the end, pocketability won out, and I bought the G5X II. I like the pop-up viewfinder for when the sunlight is too bright to compose the picture on the screen. I also looked at a roughly equivalent Sony, but they went the wrong direction for my purposes. They made the zoom longer and the lens slower. When traveling, I need the speed in interiors, and if anything need something wider than 24mm. Cropping from 120mm works well enough for the rare times I wish I had a longer lens. If I traveled with an M camera, I'd get the 11-22mm zoom, or adapt my EF-S 10-22, as well as something longer and maybe faster. At 24mm equivalent view, I do a fair amount of stitching back home of interiors and scenic vistas.

For me, though, a travel camera should let met take good pictures and stay out of the way. The point is for me not to become obsessed with photography and miss seeing and doing the things I went there for. For closer to home, and especially when photography is the point of what I'm doing, and not just incidental, the 6D2 doesn't seem cumbersome at all. OK, wearing it around my neck most of the day with the 100-400mm lens gets a bit old, but I don't do that often.

So I liked the M50, and would consider buying something in that line, but don't know what I'd use it for in real life. For this part of my life, the G5X II takes care of my mirrorless needs.

 

[tron]

I can't speak for the OP, but I have a similar experience. I still use my 5DIV regularly (especially in quarantine time projects), but the M6II is fantastic. If it was the M5II with the same performance, and integrated EVF and still a hot shoe, it would be about the perfect travel camera. When I need to be VERY light the 18-150 is a one-lens solution, if I have a little space then you can throw in things like the 11-22 (optically very good), the sigma 30mm f/1.4, etc. But I can fit that in almost any suitcase for a trip (work or other), and have a very full-featured camera, where as travelling with the 5D and a couple of lenses means compromises elsewhere.

I do something similar using DSLRs. When I go out for birding the weight is too much to carry a FF body with 24-105 and 16-35 so sometimes I get 200D with 10-18 and 18-55 (now I got 15-85 used so I will use this in the future instead). 200D with small zooms is a little nice camera.

 

[Philrp]

I really want this "M7" / 7D III mirrorless camera from Canon, but it must be RF mount or it's no good to me.

Yes my glass is worth over 4 times the body, but that's how I roll