At least two new EOS M cameras coming in 2019 [CR2]

photonius

EOS RP
Jul 13, 2013
228
13
Just curious what is the use-case that M lenses do not cover the need? If I'm correct, the existing M lenses cover the range of 11 to 200mm (17-320mm equivalent) that is quite useful for everyday use from wide to telephoto. There are a few primes (22, 28 and 32mm) and macro (28mm). I know there is no tilt-shift or longer telephoto lenses, but those are generally reserved for more pro use-cases which are covered by EF/RF series anyway. What is the limiting factor here?
Exactly, who says that someone who wants a small light system does not want some more "advanced" lenses? After all, if you look at m4/3, they have a much larger lens line-up than EOS-M, and I presume people buy all these lenses. Or maybe Canon wants me to switch to m4/3 or Fuji?

Anyway, specifically - at present with EF-S, I have 10-250 covered with kit lenses, so a bit more reach, and more then 5 degrees wider angle of view at the UWA end. Yes, maybe Canon will update the lenses at some point to increase that, but I don't count on it.
The macro, EF-S is a 60mm lens, giving a good working distance of 9cm. If I need more working distance, I could get an EF 100mm macro. The EOS-M 28mm macro gives me only a ridiculous 18mm working distance at 1:1. Ok, it's a fun little lens, but I'd put it in the gadget category, when one wants to make "wide angle" macros. Well, maybe Canon will release a longer macro for EOS-M in the future, but I don't count on it.
Low and behold, I do have an EF 100-400. That will never happen on EOS-M. In fact, many people use a Canon 80D or 7D with tele lenses. Ok, a FF Canon 5DS would give you similar cropping power (comparable pixel density as e.g. an 80D), but why should I pay 3 times just for that?
And then the EF 50mm f1.8, (equivalent to an FF 85 portrait lens) for the occasional portrait. - Nothing in EOS-M. Ok, Canon just came out with the 32, but that is equivalent to a 50mm lens on FF. Maybe Canon comes out with a 50mm at some point. I doubt it. Canon will assume that Pro photographers use FF for portrait. But who knows, maybe one does not need a portrait lens in the future anymore, all the hokeh is done by software....

So, while indeed most people never go beyond kit, if one does start to go beyond kit, the M - line is rather limiting, too limiting I think, since it has to compete with m4/3 etc.
 
I don't understand the apparent obsession that the M series is dead, and the R is a replacement for it. They are aimed at completely different markets and different price points. The M series is small and relatively inexpensive. The R we see now and the potential future models are aimed at quality output without too much concern about size or price.
 

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,298
205
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
The main thing I'm not happy about the M5/M50 is the size of the green AF square, in that I can't make it small enough to make autofocus as precisely as I want. Generally speaking, I just prefer the rebel/xxD interface to the EOS M. Otherwise, I would have bought one quite a while ago (despite this, I have almost purchased an M5 many times)
With the M50 (do not have M5) you can choose a smaller AF region for single shot AF which has helped a lot if I needed a special "point" in focus.
Menu: Shooting (red) -> Sub-Tab 6 -> AF frame size -> Small
But maybe you have found it and you need "Extra small" :)

This does not work with SERVO AF and is critical if you have low contrast in the part of the image which should be in focus but this is a natural limitation.
It works much better than the PD-AF of SLRs where the AF sensor "points" are substantially larger than the AF indicators in the viewfinder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mirage

Josh Leavitt

EOS T7i
Aug 19, 2018
92
104
I don't understand the apparent obsession that the M series is dead, and the R is a replacement for it. They are aimed at completely different markets and different price points. The M series is small and relatively inexpensive. The R we see now and the potential future models are aimed at quality output without too much concern about size or price.
Exactly. I haven't heard too many photographers lament the shortcomings of EF-S lenses and the Rebel DSLR cameras for not holding up to the quality of the EF lenses and 5D/1D DSLR cameras - why should EOS M and EOS R be any different? One market is consumer, one market is prosumer. Canon is likely keen to replace the Rebel DSLR line with the EOS M models due to fewer mechanical parts required in the assembly of mirrorless cameras (significant manufacturing and warranty service cost savings). I have a feeling EOS M is here to stay as it always was intended to appeal to mass market consumers. And until smartphones have telephoto lenses capable of reaching around 200-300mm FoV, EOS M cameras and their modest aperture kit lenses will continue to fly off the shelves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mirage

mirage

EOS RP
Jul 31, 2018
297
111
Most EOS M purchasers are new to Canon and most get no further than the bundled standard zoom lens.
I think this is only a part of EOS M / EF-M buyers. A significant proportion of EOS M series cameras and even more so EF-M lenses were and are being bought by existing Canon [DSLR] customers, often as a relatively inexpensive, smaller/lighter, second kit or as outright replacement to downsize, especially aging folks with back/health issues and frequent travellers.

My EOS 5D 3 has collected 5k shutter actuations, whereas my EOS M (1st gen) has 50k. It has accompanied me on numerous city trips, vacations, weekend excursions, climbed many mountains with me and was along on many ski slopes and backcountry randonnee tours in winter. With 18-55 kit zoom it fits into a small LowePro Dashpoint 20 pouch mounted on left backpack chest strap with immediate access. Or it comes in a small bag with any combination of 18-55, 22/2.0, 11-22, 55-200. Size is king. Best camera is the one you carry along. And it is very inconspicuous. Could take it to so many concerts and other venues where DSLRs would not have been allowed.

There simply is no equally compact camera/lens combo with better (stills) functionality and IQ available today than a Canon EOS M50 with EF-M 22/2.0. Not even to mention more affordable. "Fully competitive".
 

Stichus III

EOS M50
Dec 14, 2012
45
18
That's not the way it's working. On FF you have tons of EF lenses to choose from to cover all needs. On the Rebels/Crop cameras, you have only a limited selection of EF-S lenses. I choose deliberately only crop cameras due to weight/size. I am happy with the EF-S lenses. But I also do have a few EF lenses that do not exist in EF-S. To me, the EOS-M system is too limited in its lens choice. But I have no interest at all to buy a FF (e.g. RF) line (this refers to some point in the future, when EF and EF-S is gone, and purchasing that is no option). At present I am happy with my EF-S/EF mix of lenses and crop body. EOS-M can't do that.
The argument that the EOS M system has no future as it is too limited in its lens choice, does not make any sense. This as Canon can and will release new lenses in the future. In other words, just because the EOS M lenses are limited now, does mean it will remain this way in the future.

And to emphasize my point, if we follow your (faulty) logic, the RF mount also has no future as there are even less RF lenses available.

Anyway, just like EF lenses can be adapted to work on the RF mount (which at the moment will be a must for EOS R users), both EF and EF-S lenses can be adapted to work on the EOS M mount.

Let's hope that Canon will release many RF and EOS M lenses in the near future, so that there will be less of a need to use adapted lenses.

In any event, the future of the EOS M line will depend on its sales figures, which at the moment seem pretty good for the limited attention Canon has given this line of cameras.
 

mirage

EOS RP
Jul 31, 2018
297
111
So, while indeed most people never go beyond kit, if one does start to go beyond kit, the M - line is rather limiting, too limiting I think, since it has to compete with m4/3 etc.
I fail to see that. Yes there are many mFT. More than half of them have no AF, so to me of no interest at all. And all mFT lenses come with 1 stop disadvantage vs. EF-M. Equivalent (1 stop faster) mFT lenses are typically larger and far more expensive than EF-M.

Just some examples:
EF-M 22/2.0 is equivalent to mFt 17/1.4, which is not available. Even the Oly 17/1.8 is twice as expensive as the EF-M 22/2.0. Not even to mention the Oly 17/1.2 which is a mind-boggling 1400 € for a quarter-sensor crop lens
EF-M 28/3.5 IS STM Macro -> mFT Pana Leica 45/2.8 Macro at € 600+
EF-M 32/1.4 -> mFT Oly 25/1.2 costs way north of a grand ... plus mind-boggling size/weight for a quarter-sensor crop lens

I really fail to see I see why anybody starting out today would chose mFT over Canon EOS M/ EF-M system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxdude

mensaf

EOS M50
Aug 21, 2018
56
27
Washington, DC
I'll be grabbing the M5 MKII and passing on everything else. The only gripe I have with the M50 is the lack of weathersealing, otherwise it has been my main workhorse. Considering the price of both bodies and lenses, I bet Canon would be more concerned with that line cannibalizing their full frame mirrorless sales.
 
Oct 5, 2018
1
0
I'm late to the thread so sorry if I haven't read everything. But if I were to guess I would think that the M mount will be Canon's apsc line moving forward, and I bet sometime in the future there will be a way to adapt M to R and vice versa. It only makes sense to me since DSLR's really are going the way of the dinasaur....which is sad to me because I love DSLRs.
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
388
344
118
Williamsport, PA
Surprised to hear rumours of new M cameras in the pipeline. Struggling to understand why they wouldn't just release a budget R (in same way we've have the 1XXXD's sitting alongside 5Ds etc previously). Why would anyone invest in an M system where there's no sideways movement either across to the EF mount SLRs or upwards to the RF family moving forward? The M line up is pretty modest so assumed they'd just release a budget R and quietly retire the M completely.

I'd always just assumed the M was a little experiment into the mirrorless world and they'd taken what they'd learned and put that into the R. Am I missing something?
I see a life, for a while at least, for the M series. It could actually replace the G1 series cameras. More versatile. Right now there is a $100 difference. I would go M over G any day of the week for versatility. I can if desired use the EF/EFs lenses on it if I want to get more creative over the 18-150 lens which is more range than the G camera.
 
Oct 5, 2018
4
3
Seems obvious to me, EOS-M is for hobby/prosumer and APS-C, EOS-R is for Professional and full frame. These two lines will run side-by-side for a long time, and I expect these will be here for a long time after canon stops making DSLRs, there might be a 90D, but why make this if the M5/6 is basically the same camera?

XXXXD, XXXD, and XD will be replaced by future EOS-M cameras. XD will be replaced by EOS-R.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mirage

bhf3737

---
Sep 9, 2015
480
518
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
Exactly, who says that someone who wants a small light system does not want some more "advanced" lenses? After all, if you look at m4/3, they have a much larger lens line-up than EOS-M, and I presume people buy all these lenses. Or maybe Canon wants me to switch to m4/3 or Fuji?

Anyway, specifically - at present with EF-S, I have 10-250 covered with kit lenses, so a bit more reach, and more then 5 degrees wider angle of view at the UWA end. Yes, maybe Canon will update the lenses at some point to increase that, but I don't count on it.
The macro, EF-S is a 60mm lens, giving a good working distance of 9cm. If I need more working distance, I could get an EF 100mm macro. The EOS-M 28mm macro gives me only a ridiculous 18mm working distance at 1:1. Ok, it's a fun little lens, but I'd put it in the gadget category, when one wants to make "wide angle" macros. Well, maybe Canon will release a longer macro for EOS-M in the future, but I don't count on it.
Low and behold, I do have an EF 100-400. That will never happen on EOS-M. In fact, many people use a Canon 80D or 7D with tele lenses. Ok, a FF Canon 5DS would give you similar cropping power (comparable pixel density as e.g. an 80D), but why should I pay 3 times just for that?
And then the EF 50mm f1.8, (equivalent to an FF 85 portrait lens) for the occasional portrait. - Nothing in EOS-M. Ok, Canon just came out with the 32, but that is equivalent to a 50mm lens on FF. Maybe Canon comes out with a 50mm at some point. I doubt it. Canon will assume that Pro photographers use FF for portrait. But who knows, maybe one does not need a portrait lens in the future anymore, all the hokeh is done by software....

So, while indeed most people never go beyond kit, if one does start to go beyond kit, the M - line is rather limiting, too limiting I think, since it has to compete with m4/3 etc.
Thanks for your detailed explanation of your needs, that can be summarized to wide, macro and tele use-cases. And you believe that the "native" M lenses are too limited for those scenarios.
Why in your argument you are limiting your lens selection to native M lenses only? Have you found any disadvantage of using Canon lenses via Canon's EF/EF-S to M adapter in terms of picture quality or AF speed? OK, adapters make it a bit bulky, but Canon's adapter is only 150g and less than an inch thick.
M does not need to compete with mFT or any other system, per se, from lens availability perspective. It has its own eco system. It has enough native and adapted lenses at attractive price point to choose from. That is the reason for it's ever growing user pool and popularity.
 
Oct 5, 2018
4
3
might also be worth pointing out that i've started to see some shops running out/low on EOS-M6 bodies, so I'd expect this to be in the running for a mkII soon. And if you're doing the M6, might as well update the M5 at the same time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mensaf

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
2,058
329
Vancouver, BC
With the M50 (do not have M5) you can choose a smaller AF region for single shot AF which has helped a lot if I needed a special "point" in focus.
Menu: Shooting (red) -> Sub-Tab 6 -> AF frame size -> Small
But maybe you have found it and you need "Extra small" :)

This does not work with SERVO AF and is critical if you have low contrast in the part of the image which should be in focus but this is a natural limitation.
It works much better than the PD-AF of SLRs where the AF sensor "points" are substantially larger than the AF indicators in the viewfinder.
Thanks -- I wonder why it wouldn't be in be in continuous autofocus :( I would never have found it, because I am rarely in one-shot (and I don't own a M50, though I do use a friend's here and there).
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
I think this is only a part of EOS M / EF-M buyers. A significant proportion of EOS M series cameras and even more so EF-M lenses were and are being bought by existing Canon [DSLR] customers, often as a relatively inexpensive, smaller/lighter, second kit or as outright replacement to downsize, especially aging folks with back/health issues and frequent travellers.
As usual, the assumption that you represent ‘a significant proportion’ of any market segment is one of the common threads that unites your multiple accounts (AvTvM/fullstop/mirage). Unlike you or me, Canon has actual data on this.
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,816
35
Don't understand the reason for having both the M and R mirrrorless cameras - unless the M is the crop version. Maintaining two lines will dilute resources - Rather see canon update the current line of EOS cameras sooner - both the 7D M2 and 5D M4 are long in the tooth. Rumors are that Nikon will introduce a D6 this winter - will can match them?
 

photonius

EOS RP
Jul 13, 2013
228
13
Thanks for your detailed explanation of your needs, that can be summarized to wide, macro and tele use-cases. And you believe that the "native" M lenses are too limited for those scenarios.
Why in your argument you are limiting your lens selection to native M lenses only? Have you found any disadvantage of using Canon lenses via Canon's EF/EF-S to M adapter in terms of picture quality or AF speed? OK, adapters make it a bit bulky, but Canon's adapter is only 150g and less than an inch thick.
M does not need to compete with mFT or any other system, per se, from lens availability perspective. It has its own eco system. It has enough native and adapted lenses at attractive price point to choose from. That is the reason for it's ever growing user pool and popularity.
As I specifically mentioned previously, I'm talking about the future, when all is mirror-less. Now I'm indeed fine with EF-S/EF on dSLR.