Canon EOS 90D Specification List [CR1]

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
350
198
The EF-S 55-250mm STM is one of Canon's gems. The lens scores well in measurements on various sites. On opticallimits and TDP, the 55-250 at 200mm has about the same IQ in the centre as the 70-200mm L IS. I use it with an adapter on the M5. In fact, my copy was sharper than my 70-200mm L IS, and I sold the L lens.
And they did that lense without fluorite element and all special glass and handpolishing ,just with cheapest possible methods.
If they would make long lens with L quality to crop sensor it would be better than any big white on image quality. just saying i know they wont make
 
Last edited:

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
350
198
The EF-S 60mmf/2.8 macro balances remarkably well on an M camera. If they turn that into an EF-M 60mm f/3.5 IS STM lens I'd be very happy. I like the 60mm range for macro since at 1:1 the working distance is about a handwidth, so I can brace the lens on my thumb and either use my pinky for support on a surface or grab the branch/stem with it.

As Neuro said, a 100mm would be big regardless of sensor size.
60mm macro is good for studio macro work and for sleeping bugs. I like shoot active bugs and even 180mm is short for that .
I dont know why M-lenses need to be small they can be relatively light even nearly full frame lens sized.
I just want shoot bugs and birds without buying 10k equipments , 75% image quality is enough for me no needing 90% L lense quality.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,377
1,724
I dont know why M-lenses need to be small they can be relatively light even nearly full frame lens sized.
Only because Canon decided that they need to be small. That’s one good thing about being a lens manufacturer...you get to pick the features and characteristics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
350
198
Only because Canon decided that they need to be small. That’s one good thing about being a lens manufacturer...you get to pick the features and characteristics.
That rule wont be forever ,when canon stop making EF lenses they must make bigger M lenses too.
Or sensors are so dense on that point ,no longer ones needed.
I am not sure if canon decided any rule M lenses need to be small. When you make simple lens with small image circle its just naturally small.
and cheap when keeping aperture small too.
 
Last edited:

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,377
1,724
I am not sure if canon decided any rule M lenses need to be small. When you make simple lens with small image circle its just naturally small.
and cheap when keeping aperture small too.
Eight lenses including UWA, standard, tele- and super-zooms, a macro lens, a fast prime and a pancake lens...all with the exact same 60.9mm barrel diameter. That’s not a coincidence, that’s a design decision.
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
350
198
Eight lenses including UWA, standard, tele- and super-zooms, a macro lens, a fast prime and a pancake lens...all with the exact same 60.9mm barrel diameter. That’s not a coincidence, that’s a design decision.
Yep they can make cheap lenses that way. M serie is planned to be cheap for consumers.
 
Keep in mind what the role of the M series is. It's a small, high quality, multi-purpose camera. It's not really designed for birding, safaris, fast moving subjects (i.e. sports photograhy) and so on. There's no need for Canon to gift us EF-M lenses with long focal lengths. There's other systems and lens combinations that are optimised for that. The native EF-M 55-200mm and the adapted EF-S 55-250mm are perfectly fine for a small, high quality, multi-purpose camera. Personally, I don't think we'll ever see a Canon EF-M lens longer than the 200mm. Given that Sigma are now in the EF-M lens business, maybe they'll do it, but I doubt that too. There's more value for them (and demand from consumers) in the fast primes. Hopefully they'll produce some faster zooms too.
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
350
198
Keep in mind what the role of the M series is. It's a small, high quality, multi-purpose camera. It's not really designed for birding, safaris, fast moving subjects (i.e. sports photograhy) and so on. There's no need for Canon to gift us EF-M lenses with long focal lengths. There's other systems and lens combinations that are optimised for that. The native EF-M 55-200mm and the adapted EF-S 55-250mm are perfectly fine for a small, high quality, multi-purpose camera. Personally, I don't think we'll ever see a Canon EF-M lens longer than the 200mm. Given that Sigma are now in the EF-M lens business, maybe they'll do it, but I doubt that too. There's more value for them (and demand from consumers) in the fast primes. Hopefully they'll produce some faster zooms too.
But sounds like they making more sport able camera from 5mii or at least rumours say so. Or its just mixed to 90d rumours
When they drop 7d serie they need make room for hobby birdlers somehwere.
 
Last edited:
But sounds like they making more sport able camera from 5mii or at least rumours say so.
As someone else has previously speculated, I wouldn't be entirely suprised to find a 90D/7DIII equivalent mirrorless being made. I suspect it would be badged as a "M1" or something, sitting above the M5 (even if the M5 gets bumped to M5 II with updated specs). A possible "M1" could fit the odd specs this article outlines. If the body is larger, then ergonomically this would allow for larger lenses, especially if EF/RF mount. But as I said above the M line is a predominantly a small, high quality, multi-purpose camera. A new "M1" wouldn't really fit that, and may end up confusing consumers. But then what do I know? Bring on the end of August!!!
 
There are 17 EF-S lenses only if you count lenses that are no longer in production but still in stock at Canon USA. If you eliminate the duplicates and triplicates, there are 12.

There are now 7 EF-M lenses, and since the launch of EF-M there have also been seven new EF-S lenses launched, but only three of those were new (there were two successive replacements of the 18-55, and one each for the 18-135 and 55-250). For the pancake and white angle macro lenses, the M came before the corresponding S.

So overall, it seems like Canon is giving more love to the EF-M lineup ( which is quite logical, it’s a newer system…we’re seeing the same thing with RF lenses currently).

To your earlier point about missing lenses, what the -S lens types missing from -M are a fast standard zoom (17-55/2.8), A slow/broad range standard zoom with high IQ (15-85), and a longer macro (60/2.8). The problem is the first two of those must be relatively large lenses, at odds with the apparent philosophy of portability that characterizes EF-M lenses (not to mention the standardized 61 mm diameter, not sure you could even do a 17-55/2.8 with that narrow a barrel). The -M has a fast standard prime (with excellent IQ!) that the -S lacks.

Given the above, I could certainly argue that the EF-M lineup is not lacking, at least as far as lenses appropriate for Canon’s apparent use cases are concerned. Having said that, they appear to have all of the usual bases covered for a consumer system, and I expect they will continue to release EF-M lenses…which suggests that there will be more esoteric and perhaps interesting lenses in the future.
While it all sounds logical, I somehow can't forgive Canon an EF-M vs RF lens incompatibility. We've used EF 70-200 on our APS-C for ages. They could not foresight those stupid 2mm, when creating M? Of course, if technically, shifting the lens by 2mm would do the trick. Being a Canon, I would scrap or recreate M line to create a compatibility to RF lens. This is a HUGE disadvantage of the M, which stays pretty much isolated in that regards. And no, EF lens are not answer, those are a dead end since the introduction of the RF mount.
 

koenkooi

EOS RP
Feb 25, 2015
361
204
60mm macro is good for studio macro work and for sleeping bugs. I like shoot active bugs and even 180mm is short for that .
[..]
I use a sigma 150mm + sigma 1.4x for those, but it's a big combo. It handles well on a 7D, a bit less on the RP. On the M50 it felt like a novelty item.
I hope the 180/3.5 gets refreshed into a 200/4 for RF, preferably with IS. A 200/5.6 1:1 macro for the M would be neat, but not something I imagine Canon is working on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape
As someone else has previously speculated, I wouldn't be entirely suprised to find a 90D/7DIII equivalent mirrorless being made. I suspect it would be badged as a "M1" or something, sitting above the M5 (even if the M5 gets bumped to M5 II with updated specs). A possible "M1" could fit the odd specs this article outlines. If the body is larger, then ergonomically this would allow for larger lenses, especially if EF/RF mount. But as I said above the M line is a predominantly a small, high quality, multi-purpose camera. A new "M1" wouldn't really fit that, and may end up confusing consumers. But then what do I know? Bring on the end of August!!!
The problem is, that whatever contains an RF mount, is simply an "R" by definition. Once again an example, how badly isolated the M line is with its zero path towards the usage of an RF lens. Also - can you imagine the confusion, calling such a camera M1, while not being lens comaptible with the M line itself?
 
The problem is, that whatever contains an RF mount, is simply an "R" by definition. Once again an example, how badly isolated the M line is with its zero path towards the usage of an RF lens. Also - can you imagine the confusion, calling such a camera M1, while not being lens comaptible with the M line itself?
Yeah. I kinda agree. I speculated above about a potential "M1", but it would make much more sense to make an APS-C mirrorless camera with the specs in this article, RF mount, and call it something like an "Rs" (for "Sports"). And the M line should just be left to being small, high quality, multi-purpose. Maybe Canon, or Sigma, will build out the EF-M lens collection and keep it relevant and selling well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
350
198
I think only logical place put mirrorless crop birdling camera atm is EF mount unless they release same time M bird lense.
We see august then :)
 

koenkooi

EOS RP
Feb 25, 2015
361
204
I think only logical place put mirrorless crop birdling camera atm is EF mount unless they release same time M bird lense.
We see august then :)
Personally, I wouldn't mind an EOS R sized camera with an EF-M mount, the current adapter is quite sturdy.
 

canonical

EOS 80D
Jul 3, 2019
103
82
1. there will be no APS-C sensored EOS R camera or RF crop lenses ever. get over it.

2. EF-M mount parameters are wisely chosen to optimally serve APS-C image circle with very compact, very good IQ lenses at very competitive prices. there will never be L-lenses or super-teles in EF-M mount. not needed. future high-rez FF EOS R bodies and RF lenses will take care of all niche use cases, including birds (in flight).

3. upgrade path M - R not needed. 2 different mounts, each perfectly matched to the sensor format. 2 different lens lineups - one for best portability and max. value, one for best universality. just like fujifilm has X lenses for APS-C and G lenses for 44x33 sensors. nobody is asking fuji for an "upgrade path" from X to G system. not needed. you chose the system you want/need/can afford. or you buy both, if you need/want and can afford it. no problem at all for Fuji. no problem for Canon either. no foul optical compromise like Sony E- mount forced to serve FF image circle either.

plain to see and obvious. really strange some folks are having such difficulty understanding Canon's 2-mount strategy, especially when it is a direct continuation of Canon's strategy over the past 15 years. EF and EF-S. buying EF glass for crop sensor use was possible but did not make much sense back in the DSLR days either. if you want/need FF you gotta buy FF gear, camera AND lenses. if crop sensor is good enough or better for your photographic use case, all you ever need is crop gear.

4. i think the specs are for EOS M5 II and i don't think the camera will be much bulkier than current M5. Sony A6### (and eventually A7000) and Fuji XT-3 are Canon's competitors here. a slightly bigger grip to accomodate LP-E6N power pack will give M5 II enough power for dual DIGIC, best in class tracking DP-AF, "decent" 4k video as well as enough stamina to significantly expand EOS M system capabilities and well into 7D III territory. most EF-M lenses will focus fast enough on M5 II for action and moving subjects - no problem thanks to low mass of moving lens elements and STM or Nano-USM AF drives. especially the 3 EF-M lenses - 18-150, 28/3.5 and 55-200 - already equipped to better utilize AF system (149 instead of 99 points across 100x88% of frame) on M50 than other EF-M lenses.
btw: EF-S 55-250 can only utilize 99 AF points with 80/80 frame coverage. EF-M 55-200 is clearly better choice on EOS M bodies. ;-)

Over time Canon will likely update all/most EF-lenses with those improved AF / lens communication capabilities.

5. EOS 90D not really needed any longer. Canon will likely still launch it, because there are still enough noobs around believing "only a DSLR is a real camera". lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Serenesunrise

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,055
290
1. there will be no APS-C sensored EOS R camera or RF crop lenses ever. get over it.

2. EF-M mount parameters are wisely chosen to optimally serve APS-C image circle with very compact, very good IQ lenses at very competitive prices. there will never be L-lenses or super-teles in EF-M mount. not needed. future high-rez FF EOS R bodies and RF lenses will take care of all niche use cases, including birds (in flight).

3. upgrade path M - R not needed. 2 different mounts, each perfectly matched to the sensor format. 2 different lens lineups - one for best portability and max. value, one for best universality. just like fujifilm has X lenses for APS-C and G lenses for 44x33 sensors. nobody is asking fuji for an "upgrade path" from X to G system. not needed. you chose the system you want/need/can afford. or you buy both, if you need/want and can afford it. no problem at all for Fuji. no problem for Canon either. no foul optical compromise like Sony E- mount forced to serve FF image circle either.

plain to see and obvious. really strange some folks are having such difficulty understanding Canon's 2-mount strategy, especially when it is a direct continuation of Canon's strategy over the past 15 years. EF and EF-S. buying EF glass for crop sensor use was possible but did not make much sense back in the DSLR days either. if you want/need FF you gotta buy FF gear, camera AND lenses. if crop sensor is good enough or better for your photographic use case, all you ever need is crop gear.

4. i think the specs are for EOS M5 II and i don't think the camera will be much bulkier than current M5. Sony A6### (and eventually A7000) and Fuji XT-3 are Canon's competitors here. a slightly bigger grip to accomodate LP-E6N power pack will give M5 II enough power for dual DIGIC, best in class tracking DP-AF, "decent" 4k video as well as enough stamina to significantly expand EOS M system capabilities and well into 7D III territory. most EF-M lenses will focus fast enough on M5 II for action and moving subjects - no problem thanks to low mass of moving lens elements and STM or Nano-USM AF drives. especially the 3 EF-M lenses - 18-150, 28/3.5 and 55-200 - already equipped to better utilize AF system (149 instead of 99 points across 100x88% of frame) on M50 than other EF-M lenses.
btw: EF-S 55-250 can only utilize 99 AF points with 80/80 frame coverage. EF-M 55-200 is clearly better choice on EOS M bodies. ;-)

Over time Canon will likely update all/most EF-lenses with those improved AF / lens communication capabilities.

5. EOS 90D not really needed any longer. Canon will likely still launch it, because there are still enough noobs around believing "only a DSLR is a real camera". lol.
6. An RF Mount aps-c camera can take RF tell lenses. Not sayin it will happen. Just s saying it might.
 

canonical

EOS 80D
Jul 3, 2019
103
82
6. An RF Mount aps-c camera can take RF tell lenses. Not sayin it will happen. Just s saying it might.
Don't think so. EOS R is a dedicated, pure FF system. Not crop, not "medium format". Neither sensor, nor lenses. Good old 36x24mm all the way.

And really no need for a crop R body. Upcoming hi-rez EOS "RS" with 60+ MP will yield enough pixels in crop mode, see Sony A7R 4 / 26MP in crop mode. Imagined problem goes away all by itself. :)
 
1. there will be no APS-C sensored EOS R camera or RF crop lenses ever. get over it.
You've got it possibly wrong, unless Canon states it clearly and once for all. Get over it too ;-)

2. EF-M mount parameters are wisely chosen to optimally serve APS-C image circle with very compact, very good IQ lenses at very competitive prices. there will never be L-lenses or super-teles in EF-M mount. not needed. not needed. future high-rez FF EOS R bodies and RF lenses will take care of all niche use cases, including birds (in flight).
"Wisely choosen" contradicts your claimed removal of the ability to have L- lens or super-tele for an APS-C format, which would be a bad message for the BIF fans.

3. upgrade path M - R not needed. 2 different mounts, each perfectly matched to the sensor format. 2 different lens lineups - one for best portability and max. value, one for best universality. just like fujifilm has X lenses for APS-C and G lenses for 44x33 sensors. nobody is asking fuji for an "upgrade path" from X to G system. not needed. you chose the system you want/need/can afford. or you buy both, if you need/want and can afford it. no problem at all for Fuji. no problem for Canon either. no foul optical compromise like Sony E- mount forced to serve FF image circle either.

plain to see and obvious. really strange some folks are having such difficulty understanding Canon's 2-mount strategy, especially when it is a direct continuation of Canon's strategy over the past 15 years. EF and EF-S. buying EF glass for crop sensor use was possible but did not make much sense back in the DSLR days either. if you want/need FF you gotta buy FF gear, camera AND lenses. if crop sensor is good enough or better for your photographic use case, all you ever need is crop gear.
Thank you for your dismissal of our usage of 70-200/2.8 IS for both the 5DIV and 70D as a backup. I expect we were not alone with such a scenario. Or are you admitting it was just a coincidence, a by product by Canon back then? I don't care for Fuji, the advantage is simply there, is historicaly provable by many buyers and would be benefical even in a MILC area ....

4. i think the specs are for EOS M5 II and i don't think the camera will be much bulkier than current M5. Sony A6### (and eventually A7000) and Fuji XT-3 are Canon's competitors here. a slightly bigger grip to accomodate LP-E6N power pack will give M5 II enough power for dual DIGIC, best in class tracking DP-AF, "decent" 4k video as well as enough stamina to significantly expand EOS M system capabilities and well into 7D III territory.
Please stop mentioning M5 and 7D line in the same paragrapf, for two reasons - 1) Ergonomically wise those bodies are quite different in size and handling 2) It is you who claims M series line is fine with the 200mm max limit. Now go and tell that to the 7Dx owners :)