Official: Canon EOS M3 and It's Not Coming To North America

[DRR]

I've worked with a number of brand and product launches in my career. One thing that happens quite often is that launches are soft launches - a soft drink, for example, will only "launch" in certain markets, so that the company can get feedback on what consumers like, and don't like, and they take that information to tweak the formula until they are sure it will scale to the full market.

These test markets, are never big markets - New York, Los Angeles, Chicago - they are always smaller markets with a lower population, and more controlled demographic factors. Denver, SLC, Columbus, Raleigh-Durham. This allows the company to get their toes wet with a launch, without the full-scale investment.

In Canon terms, this is without a doubt, what's happening here. Canon has learned their lesson with the M1 - that camera did not sell well here because there was not enough demand. It sold so poorly in fact that they had to be firesaled, and inventory cleared at half the price. This was a BIG hit to Canon's bottom line. This was Canon's "New Coke."

Mirrorless sells well in Asia. So it will be introduced in Asia. Europe is a much smaller market than the US. So they are trying a staggered approach. Sell where they know it will sell (Asia) and also intro in a market that is smaller, and you can seed more effectively (Europe). Avoid the market where you learned, just a year or two ago, that DSLR sales are still strong and mirrorless is not. (North America).

This is the smart financial move by Canon. Even had they intro'ed the M3 in the US, a $799 mirrorless camera would not sell well against a $799 DSLR. So why invest in it? The people who really want it will import from another country, with no loss of investment from Canon.

I still believe Canon will eventually make the Rebel line into APS-C mirrorless with an EF-M mount. My guess is they will have a Rebel EF-M line with Rebel level features, and a compact EF-M line that is small (the M line). But since DSLRs are selling well enough in North America right now, it's not the time to make that move. For now, continue to sell EF-M in Asia, seed it in Europe, wait for maturity in these two markets, and once DSLR sales slow in NA, Canon is in a perfect position to intro new products to NA. It will at that point be a much more mature system at a better price point.

I am a pre-firesale M owner. I was not going to buy a new $799 M anyway, so no big loss to me. My DSLR and its fast lenses gets 99% of the use.

 

[iron-t]

Bah! I have an M, the 18-55 and the 22. Love the concept and like the lenses, but it doesn't get used much because I grab the 5D3 whenever I want to be reasonably sure I can get the shot (iPhone 6 Plus when it doesn't matter). Tried to do a family vacation with just the M and it was a total failure. Just try getting it to focus in low light, say Disney at sundown. I regretted not hauling the 5D3.

The M3 might be exactly the update I want, but it's not coming to the US. I too am contemplating offloading the M and picking up an SL1 instead. The kit is going refurbished for $359 right now, I could lose the EF to EF-M adapter and would have an onboard flash. And the OVF and phase AF come along free!

 

[crashpc]

Of course $799 mirrorless will sell poorly compared to $799 DLSR, when it has slower AF, less FPS, shallower buffer, NO viewfinder, weaker flash, and we could go on and on. It´s really poor. Did Canon people sh!t themselves in pants? What do they smoke? I like M3 very much, but there is NO chance to buy it for that price. It IS DOA in Europe for sure.

 

[Psyclone]

Well, Canon, if you're not going to let me spend money on the M3 then you'd better give me an upgrade path for the SL1.

 

[fxk]

Looks like the demand for Canon mirrorless system is not that great in US

Agreed. If and when Canon sees enough demand here, a worthy mirrorless body will be introduced. As long as Canon keeps selling DSLRs, there's not much reason to change course, forum rantings notwithstanding.

So canon are holding off until theres one good enough for the yanks? It's that kind of self-awareness that makes America friends all over the world.

Speaking as a Yank, "...A worthy mirrorless body..." is pretty arrogant and demeaning to the rest of the world. Remember the term "the ugly American?" Seems we don't learn.

As for the camera, yeah, it isn't everything everyone could want. Nothing ever will be. I believe it may be a good camera (primarily AF tests will tell) though expensive, and after adding the extra cost of the EVF...

For me, it is still the right camera because of the size (has to travel on a M/C), and I am quite happy with the lenses available (yes, I have the 11-22), and the quality of the resulting photos. I also like that I can utilize some of my old Leica glass on the M bodies. Guess I'll hold my nose and reach for the plastic.

 

[bf]

No new lens, bummer! No official release in US, bummer! I don't get why they don't bring it on the gray market? US is the best place to sale the M2's clearance!

 

[mangobutter]

Buy it on eBay. Why the whining? Everything is available everywhere =) BTW, the M1 is just fine. I love my M1. The focus speed is not a problem at all. And the resulting photos are great.

 

[scyrene]

I've worked with a number of brand and product launches in my career. One thing that happens quite often is that launches are soft launches - a soft drink, for example, will only "launch" in certain markets, so that the company can get feedback on what consumers like, and don't like, and they take that information to tweak the formula until they are sure it will scale to the full market.

These test markets, are never big markets - New York, Los Angeles, Chicago - they are always smaller markets with a lower population, and more controlled demographic factors. Denver, SLC, Columbus, Raleigh-Durham. This allows the company to get their toes wet with a launch, without the full-scale investment.

In Canon terms, this is without a doubt, what's happening here. Canon has learned their lesson with the M1 - that camera did not sell well here because there was not enough demand. It sold so poorly in fact that they had to be firesaled, and inventory cleared at half the price. This was a BIG hit to Canon's bottom line. This was Canon's "New Coke."

Mirrorless sells well in Asia. So it will be introduced in Asia. Europe is a much smaller market than the US. So they are trying a staggered approach. Sell where they know it will sell (Asia) and also intro in a market that is smaller, and you can seed more effectively (Europe). Avoid the market where you learned, just a year or two ago, that DSLR sales are still strong and mirrorless is not. (North America).

This is the smart financial move by Canon. Even had they intro'ed the M3 in the US, a $799 mirrorless camera would not sell well against a $799 DSLR. So why invest in it? The people who really want it will import from another country, with no loss of investment from Canon.

I still believe Canon will eventually make the Rebel line into APS-C mirrorless with an EF-M mount. My guess is they will have a Rebel EF-M line with Rebel level features, and a compact EF-M line that is small (the M line). But since DSLRs are selling well enough in North America right now, it's not the time to make that move. For now, continue to sell EF-M in Asia, seed it in Europe, wait for maturity in these two markets, and once DSLR sales slow in NA, Canon is in a perfect position to intro new products to NA. It will at that point be a much more mature system at a better price point.

I am a pre-firesale M owner. I was not going to buy a new $799 M anyway, so no big loss to me. My DSLR and its fast lenses gets 99% of the use.

I don't doubt your expertise, but I'm intrigued - how come Europe is a smaller market? Its population is greater than the US. Do Americans buy more gadgets per capita, or do other companies lead Canon in Europe, or is it something else?

 

[scyrene]

Buy it on eBay. Why the whining? Everything is available everywhere =) BTW, the M1 is just fine. I love my M1. The focus speed is not a problem at all. And the resulting photos are great.

I think most EOS M users will agree, for the (eventual) price and weight, it offers excellent image quality.

 

[tacoman]

I sold my EOS-M and bought an A6000 in October. When the M3 first started leaking, I was having second thoughts about that, but feel very good about it this morning!

I loved a lot of things about my M - the 22mm is a fantastic lens, so is the 11-22. I prefer the smaller size of the M to the A6000 and miss the touch screen (guess I could get an A5100 for those, but it has some of the M shortcomings). I also miss the familiar menu layout of the Canon, since I'm used to it from my 70D. But, I decided that Canon didn't care about the enthusiast mirrorless market and Sony did, so I went where I saw a future.

I don't know if abandoning the North American mirrorless market is a good call for Canon. I suspect that people like me who want a mirrorless as a second travel system do not make a large enough market, and people who aren't already invested in Canon have no reason to pick it over Sony. And Sony serves me well. With Sony, Nikon 1, Micro Four Thirds, Samsung, and others entrenched in the North American market, I can see why Canon is taking a pass.

The risk for Canon is that I'm considering a full frame in the next 12-18 months. Prior to this, the 6D would have been the only camera in the running for me (can't afford the 5D). Now the A7 is also on my radar. My Canon primes and Speedlights, along with a continued preference for Canon over Sony will probably still drive me to the 6D or successor, but that's not the sure thing that it was before I bought the Sony.​

 

[lw]

Of course $799 mirrorless will sell poorly compared to $799 DLSR, when it has slower AF, less FPS, shallower buffer, NO viewfinder, weaker flash, and we could go on and on. It´s really poor. Did Canon people sh!t themselves in pants? What do they smoke? I like M3 very much, but there is NO chance to buy it for that price. It IS DOA in Europe for sure.

The M3 is cheaper than the new DSLRs in Europe though.
The M3 kit is £90 cheaper than the 750D kit.
The 760D price hasn't been announced as a kit yet, but the body only is £50 more expensive than the M3 kit.

Whether £599 for the M3 kit is still competitive with new MILC cameras from other manufacturers is another question of course.

 

[DRR]

I don't doubt your expertise, but I'm intrigued - how come Europe is a smaller market? Its population is greater than the US. Do Americans buy more gadgets per capita, or do other companies lead Canon in Europe, or is it something else?

Sorry, this was a false assumption based on old data. It appears as though camera sales to Europe now outnumber camera sales to the Americas - since about 2012 or so. Your post made me look up some recent data, it looks like the Euro market is at least as big as Americas, in some cases larger.

Based on that, I have no idea why M3 would go to Europe and not the US. One speculation I have though, is from looking at some more recent data, it does appear mirrorless is taking hold in Europe at a faster rate than Americas, so this may be enough to make Canon believe M3 will be better received in Europe than the US.

 

[Famateur]

Looks like the demand for Canon mirrorless system is not that great in US

Agreed. If and when Canon sees enough demand here, a worthy mirrorless body will be introduced. As long as Canon keeps selling DSLRs, there's not much reason to change course, forum rantings notwithstanding.

So canon are holding off until theres one good enough for the yanks? It's that kind of self-awareness that makes America friends all over the world.

Wow...okay. Didn't mean to make anyone angry or offend them.

Tinky, I generally enjoy reading your thoughtful posts, so the sarcastic jab at "yanks" and insulting their image throughout the world took me a bit by surprise. If it was meant in good spirit, an emoticon next time would help. I'll try not to take it personally and chalk it up to disappointment in the M launch news. I'll also try not to judge your character and that of your fellow citizens by a single forum post, too.

A few things (feel free to call it defensive, damage control, whatever... ):

1. Not sure when all of North America became "yanks", but unless things drastically changed overnight, it includes Canada and Mexico. I guess that makes all three countries' populations arrogant, too, for not demanding mirrorless cameras?

2. The last time I was in the UK, I couldn't find a decent root beer or a jar of peanut butter (over a few ounces) to save my life. I'm guessing it's because...there simply isn't a demand for it. Does that make the British arrogant and hamper their international appeal as potential friends? Of course not...

3. I think the "making friends all over the world" (or difficulty thereof) has a LOT more to do with the geopolitical policies of our respective governments (okay, and perhaps some unfortunate, stereotypical tourists) and not about the attitudes of the citizenry, which consists of a broad spectrum of opinions, attitudes and even cultures. I would expect that the British were still generally a delightful people in the grand old days of the British Empire, despite their government dominating much of the world.

4. Yuichi Ishizuka, president and COO, Canon U.S.A., Inc appears to be Japanese. Is he an arrogant American for choosing not to bring the M3 to the North American market? Was it because he thinks Americans are arrogant that he chose not to bring the M3 to the North American market. Does a business even care about arrogance of its customers? Nope. It's about market demand -- and that is entirely what my comment was about.

I think it was my choice of adjective (worthy) that caused the heartburn. My bad -- should have used "appealing" or "impressive" or something. Based on your comment, it sounds like it came across as me saying, "The M3 might be good enough for the rest of the world, but it's not good enough for us, and the rest of the world just doesn't know any better." If I had known that's how it would be taken, I would have used different language. My sincere apologies.


Dare I try again?

There isn't enough demand in North America, in Canon management's opinion, to justify launching a mirrorless body here ("here" being North America ). This market, for whatever reason, prefers its DLSRs, and it would likely take a truly compelling mirrorless body to change that.

It appears to me that Canon is willing to let other brands spend the money and take the risks to try to win over DSLR users to the mirrorless concept, especially after its failure with the M1. If/when that happens in North America, Canon will re-enter the market, and when it does, it will need a compelling, impressive camera -- worthy (gasp) of its competition -- to succeed.

Hopefully that was a bit better communicated. We okay now?








Now for a baseless personal theory on the difficulty of winning DSLR users over to mirrorless in the North American market: It might be that the average consumer looking to get something more capable than their iPhone or Powershot (which I believe is the primary market for the M) might have a hard time seeing enough difference (especially because of physical appearance) between a mirrorless body and an advanced point-and-shoot.

My hunch is that, whether justified or not, consumers here (North America) see a DSLR as a "serious" camera and see mirrorless as a compromised stepping stone to what they really want (or think they want). They might be thinking, "Why use this little thing that looks like my friend's G Series, but with interchangeable lenses? If I'm going to have to mess with lenses, I might as well go for it and get a DSLR." Not saying that's what I think or if it's right or wrong...just a thought.

I can't tell you how many times people see my modest DSLR and say, "Wow -- that's a big camera. You must know what you're doing." If that same person goes to buy a camera with that perception, they're going to choose the Rebel, not the M. After all, it's a big, cool camera that's sure to produce better images and that now others will be impressed by, too. It doesn't matter how capable a mirrorless body is, it won't sell well in this market if a DSLR in the same price tier exists -- until this idea of "bigger is better" or "bigger is pro" is successfully countered. I think that'll be awhile in North America, and apparently, so does Canon, USA.

Now you know why my kids often refer to me as "the old windbag."

 

[RLPhoto]

Meh, would skip it if it did arrive to the US.

 

[AvTvM]

I don't really believe the theories about US and/or North Americans buying behaviour re. "(only) large camera (DSLR) = good camera". ;D

There are better informed and less informed (potential) customers in any market.

The original EOS M (1) failed not only in the US, but also in Europe. Not because of its size, but because of the hugely inflated PRICE Canon was asking at launch for a camera with sub-par specifications and functionality compared to similar competitive offerings. I am convinced, if Canon had priced it slightly lower than the EOS SL1/100D (DSLR), it would have sold reasonably well - in Europe and in the U.S. too and it would have spared Canon the firesale and the embarassment.

Given the EOS-M history, I consider it all the more STUPID of Canon to again try and launch the EOS M3 about 30% higher than the relevant competitive market segment (medium-specced viewfinder-less APS-C MILC) - at least in Europe (have not checked Japanese/Asian MSRPs).

At launch price the M3 will flop in Europe and it would also flop in the U.S. if it would be launched there at USD 769 BODY only, and without external EVF (+250 USD/€).

Not because of its "smaller than DSLR size", but because of Canon's ridiculously stupid asking price. :

 

[Eldar]

I don't really believe the theories about US and/or North Americans buying behaviour re. "(only) large camera (DSLR) = good camera". ;D

There are better informed and less informed (potential) customers in any market.

The original EOS M (1) failed not only in the US, but also in Europe. Not because of its size, but because of the hugely inflated PRICE Canon was asking at launch for a camera with sub-par specifications and functionality compared to similar competitive offerings. I am convinced, if Canon had priced it slightly lower than the EOS SL1/100D (DSLR), it would have sold reasonably well - in Europe and in the U.S. too and it would have spared Canon the firesale and the embarassment.

Given the EOS-M history, I consider it all the more STUPID of Canon to again try and launch the EOS M3 about 30% higher than the relevant competitive market segment (medium-specced viewfinder-less APS-C MILC) - at least in Europe (have not checked Japanese/Asian MSRPs).

At launch price the M3 will flop in Europe and it would also flop in the U.S. if it would be launched there at USD 769 BODY only, and without external EVF (+250 USD/€).

Not because of its "smaller than DSLR size", but because of Canon's ridiculously stupid asking price. :

Price in Norway for the M3 w/ 18-55 IS is app. $900, including 25% sales tax.

 

[GrumpyMoose]

I sold my EOS-M and bought an A6000 in October. When the M3 first started leaking, I was having second thoughts about that, but feel very good about it this morning!

I loved a lot of things about my M - the 22mm is a fantastic lens, so is the 11-22. I prefer the smaller size of the M to the A6000 and miss the touch screen (guess I could get an A5100 for those, but it has some of the M shortcomings). I also miss the familiar menu layout of the Canon, since I'm used to it from my 70D. But, I decided that Canon didn't care about the enthusiast mirrorless market and Sony did, so I went where I saw a future.
​

^This exactly!

I recently sold off most of my Canon gear (large DSLRs & Lenses) except for my EOS M, in favor of Sony mirrorless (a6000 & a7R). I figured I'd give Canon one last chance, to which they have now pulled off a spectacular FAIL!

While I may still pickup an imported M3 one day just out of curiosity, my path forward now is much simpler. As there's virtually no chance of Sony repeating the same blunder by not releasing their new a7000 to NA, I will simply focus there when the time comes to upgrade my a6000, and pay no more attention to Canon.

Canon has merely doubled down on their commitment to the same old tired and uninspiring path of releasing ever bigger and more bloated dinosaur DSLRs at equally more bloated and ridiculous prices.​

 

[Famateur]

Looks like the demand for Canon mirrorless system is not that great in US

Agreed. If and when Canon sees enough demand here, a worthy mirrorless body will be introduced. As long as Canon keeps selling DSLRs, there's not much reason to change course, forum rantings notwithstanding.

So canon are holding off until theres one good enough for the yanks? It's that kind of self-awareness that makes America friends all over the world.

Speaking as a Yank, "...A worthy mirrorless body..." is pretty arrogant and demeaning to the rest of the world. Remember the term "the ugly American?" Seems we don't learn.

See my long(er)-winded reply to Tinky for a full response (particularly my second attempt in which I state that it must be "worthy of its competition" not worthy of an elitist American, as was understood from my apparently poor choice of adjective). I might not be the best communicator, but your assumption that I am arrogant and am demeaning the rest of the world and "don't learn" seems to exhibit a touch of the arrogance of which you accuse me -- particularly the "we don't learn" part. Were you speaking directly to me with condescension, or were you speaking past me to those I might have offended, apologizing on my behalf? It's amazing to me how quickly people rush to judgment to criticize what they see as a rash or improper judgment.

This forum is rife with attacks hurled at Canon for its (in some people's opinion) ineptitude for producing what they consider a worthless, half-hearted mirrorless camera -- simply because it doesn't possess the features they think it should. These "it's unworthy of me or my money" comments are all over the place. Notice that I have never participated in any such derogatory comments. My comments have always been an attempt at market analysis in trying to figure out Canon's strategy.

It's strange to me that my statement about a potential future mirrorless body being exceptional once the North American market shows strong demand for mirrorless bodies has instantly labeled me as arrogant, demeaning and stubbornly ignorant. Yet, comments from people from a smattering of countries around the world -- even Americans -- who consider the M a worthless wasted effort by Canon, are NOT elitist in their disdainful rejection of the product and their assumption that it should be designed just for them? Bizzaro world...

Anyway, arguments like this suck, so I'm going to leave it here. Back to the cameras... :-X

 

[andrewflo]

Wow what a disappointment... pretty evident that it's not worth Canon's wallet to distribute to North America because they predict the M3 wouldn't sell.

As much as we can make a fuss about it, I'm sure they have a better idea about this than we do unfortunately.

Feeling a bit robbed for buying EF-M glass and accessories though. Really anything in the Canon eco-system because I specifically got an EOS M + adapter to keep it all in one camp.

If anything this is making me feel like I should learn a lesson or something.

 

[Act444]

Initially I was disappointed that yet again we would miss out.

But then again...sounds like the price would have been around $799 which would have been too much anyway (I would at least hope the EVF would be thrown in at that point) so I will stick with the first M which has been serving my needs just fine, and continues to. I suppose what I won't do is continue to invest in the system and the lenses...

Too bad though, it looked intriguing and had potential. It might be possible that I may have to start looking to another brand for my compact needs!