Opinion: Canon is causing its own problems with the RF mount

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,033
209
A bit of plastic piping and some duct tape and the RF lens will connect. You might lose some autofocus capabilities but it will be fine
 

bks54

EOS M50
Aug 30, 2018
40
40
I think adapting RF lenses to current EOS-M cameras is impossible. But what about a future EOS-M camera? Could Canon make a mount that adjusts to accept either EF-M or RF lenses?
 
Reactions: NetMage

CanonGrunt

EOS 80D
Jan 28, 2012
128
23
I wouldn’t be surprised if they looked at the numbers, and saw how many people that buy their Crop sensor and lower cameras never switch to Full Frame. Like my sister is still on a T3i, and is just now looking at a used M5 or new M50. She does want to expand with a lens or two though. They sell a lot of these lower cameras, from the point & shoots, to the G series, to the crop SLR, & now the M’s, and a lot of people just never graduate to full frame. They could definitely keep the M line around and make plenty of profit off of this massive customer base, and have the R line be for the pros / Semi- pros. Two lines would only bug a few of us in the grand scheme of things.

But hey, at least I can ise EF lenses on both systems flawlessly with the Canon adapters. I love my little M5 for light travel. Probably going to keep it, my 5DsR, and pick up the EOS R for now. I’ll just have to think out my lens selection more carefully in the future in certain cases.
 
Aug 31, 2018
7
17
A different thought: perhaps what Canon is signaling is that the APS-C format is being re-situated for consumers ONLY.

Consider why APS-C came about -- originally for film, it was a way to have a smaller negative with cheaper film and processing. When digital came along, sensors were really expensive. APS-C crop-frame sensors were cheaper than full-frame, and so it was possible to have a decent, enthusiast- or consumer-level camera with a smaller sensor, lighter optics, etc. Thus from Canon we ended up with the Rebel (xxxD) and enthusiast (xxD) APS-C cameras. Marketing wise this was genius -- the professionals had FF (xD), the enthusiasts and consumers had APS-C, and the EF mount served all. The EF-S was a concession particularly at the wide end where the APS-C cameras needed the help. But the pros weren't seriously interested in mounting an EF-S lens on their 1Dx or 5D so that was no big deal.

But now sensors are (somewhat) less expensive, and the delta between FF and APS-C less than before. So Canon now resolves the three markets -- consumer, enthusiast, and pro -- into two spaces:

1) FF -- R series cameras, RF lenses, EF lenses can be adapted. For pros and enthusiasts. We'll see a '1R', '5R', '6R' and '7R', all equivalents of the corresponding xD cameras. Maybe an '8R' which is today's 80D as FF and mirrorless.

2) APS-C -- less expensive M series cameras, EF-M lenses, EF lenses adapted if you need it but most won't bother. For consumers. Call it the 'Rebel-M' series. This is the M1, M10, M5, M50, etc all brought forward.

Enthusiasts (like me, an 80D owner)? We go FF and to the R series. That's where we want to be so as to use EF lenses and RF lenses in the future. We're not going to go to the M series just as we don't stay in the Rebel series for very long today. Design an '8R' that brings the 80D into mirrorless and FF, at a price point around a current 80D, and I'm there.

So over time Canon has two series, R and M, and two lens sets, RF and EF-M. RF lenses come out as quickly as Canon can do so; Canon eventually duplicates the EF capabilities in the RF catalog. EF-M lenses come out when Canon sees a market. EF lenses and D series cameras are made until the demand goes away.
 

hendrik-sg

EOS RP
Apr 21, 2011
246
20
I do not understand the strategy at all. They at the same time will announce highest end EF Superteles (after releasing very expensive TS Lenses recently), high end RF lenses and a higher end EF-M lens. So i do not see which mount will be obsolete next.

Generally, i would say the lower end EF-M and EF-S lenses and bodies can be obsoleted the easiest, without upsetting customers (as the Nikon 1). Most users have a single body with kit lens, which they will replace by a new kit at given time, by a Smartphone maybe.

EF-S is maybe even less relevant, this lenses can be used on M, and on RF it's less relevent, who buys a FF camera to use it in crop mode.

EF-R is the new line, and they come with some offers that look serious. It should stay in future

EF could be replaced by EF-R over time, depending on the success of the new mount. EF is usable on EF-R and a mount conversion service for the newer/more expensive lenses would be thinkable.

But anyways, as a heavily invested EF User, i feel somehow frustrated. My mount could get obsolete, my lenses loosing value much faster than planed, my bodies not beeing suitable for the newest lenses. This is emotional of course, but at the moment i am not in mood for money spending, so better use what i have, knowing that my skills will be the limiting factor for ever. But it kills the GAS, and in some years i might be no longer using my old gear, and buy a entry level compact camera, in G9 style maybe (or a better phone)

In opposit to the FD > EF Transition, this now not promises so much progress. mirrorless by itself may be a hype, but it does not make my pics better. Autofocus did and the digital development was fast these days. It's not comparable.
 
Last edited:

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,080
1,298
I think adapting RF lenses to current EOS-M cameras is impossible. But what about a future EOS-M camera? Could Canon make a mount that adjusts to accept either EF-M or RF lenses?
I doubt that would be feasible. But they could make an APS-C MILC with the R mount, and an adapter for M lenses (albeit likely a rather kludgy adapter). But really, I don’t think either will actually happen. If Canon had felt mounting RF lenses on APS-C MILCs was important, they’d have built that capability in from the outset (e.g. designed the R mount with a longer FFD such than an R-to-M adapter would be possible).
 

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
A different thought: perhaps what Canon is signaling is that the APS-C format is being re-situated for consumers ONLY...
Nikon tried that. Conceded the high-end crop sensor market to Canon's 7D line. It didn't work out so well for them. Hence the D500. Mirrorless technology just isn't capable of competing for the same customers as the 7D and D500 line is targeted at. Maybe someday, but not anytime soon.
 

lightthief

EOS T7i
Feb 23, 2014
73
5
Like others, i feel somehow frustrated. Why?

It seems, the RF Mount proofs that Canon can and will devellop "better" lenses (2.0 zoom & 50 1.2) than for EF.
When i remeber right, some people here said a shorter mount is better for lenses with focal lenghts <50-100mm. Above that, there is no advantage.
EVF is in some regards better or worse than OVF. Am i wrong, when i say: wildlife-long-lense-users prefer OVF and wedding-portrait-landscape-fans prefer EVF?
When i'm right, i think we will get many new RF lenses below 100mm (where this shorter mount shines), and the longer lenses will come, when EVF is equal or better than OVF.
I fear, we will not see any new EF lenses with less than < 100mm in the future. Why should Canon devellop a EF 20 1.4, when it is more easy to get a better ER 20 1.4. Does anyone expect a EF 50 1.2, now?
The only thing, that speaks for EF lenses is this EF-RF-adapter with filter. The small adapter-filter can be very great and cheap for a TS-E 17 or the 11-24. But can we expect a EF 24/28 1.? any time?
I hope i'm wrong - but i think, with more RF lenses and no new EF, the OVF will die sooner than later. And in some situations, i prefer the OVF...
 
Jan 5, 2016
5
2
My conclusion from all the helpful discussion is that I won't buy the M5 (or follow on) that I had considered. When I wanted small and light, I added a Rebel (T4i) to my collection and recently got the 77D. Although Canon hasn't filled out the EF-S lenses as much as I would like, I can pick and choose from the EF lens line to fill out the selections. It has worked out great.

For a simple example, for 135 format angle of view equivalents of 35ish and 85ish, I use the EF-S 24mm pancake and the EF 50mm f/1.8 for a small, light, and inexpensive kit. If I want to fill out the lenses, there are other EF 24mm lenses to choose from, maybe the new 85 f/1.4 for longer reach, and so on.

Contrast to the EOS M situation: there's the wonderful EF-M 22mm, the EF-M 28mm macro, the new EF-M 32mm, and then .... a bunch of kit zooms I don't want and the opportunity to use an EF-M adapter.

All of Canon's love has gone to EF lenses in the past. Now that love will be split with the RF lenses. I don't see Canon spending much energy on EF-S (but I don't need that) nor on EF-M, which I'd definitely would want if I purchased as EOS M camera.

Canon has 4 lens lines to maintain while Nikon has 3. Both Canon and Nikon mostly neglect the EF-S/DX lenses, so no big deal, but Canon's in a weird spot with EF-M. I know it wouldn't have been optimal, but I wish Canon had gone with EF-S for their crop frame mirrorless cameras. Yeah, yeah, the adapter, but I think the focus on 3 lens lines instead of 4 would have been better.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,275
550
I expect to see adapters for M to EOS R from Chinese companies, but they may not have electronic contacts.

In the case of the M to EOS R, the 8mm difference in throat diameter should let them get away with a 2mm increase in registration distance, it works for Nikon to Canon, and Nikon F has a 46.5mm throat diameter (5.5mm less) and a 2mm longer registration distance.

For the EOS R to M, a TC like adapter with glass would be required because it would need to sit even further from the sensor. The likelihood that someone would turn out a high quality adapter a bit remote to me.

All this assumes that there is a demand for them which justifies engineering the adapters. It does not take a huge demand for small Chinese companies to get into a niche market if its just a matter of machining a piece of rod stock, but optics takes much more of a investment..
 
Sep 4, 2018
1
0
Canon did the right thing by introducing the RF mount. Main reason why they did it was to maximize the optical strengths of having a larger diameter and closer distance. The EF mount was designed for a DSLR. Adapting the MiLC to use EF lenses compromises the ability to take advantage of a diameter and flange advantages. EFM lenses are optically superior and sharper than all EFS, EF, and some L series lenses. The reason is clear. EFM lenses are closer to the sensor and are optimized for MiLC cameras. My M5 with the 11-22mm is sharper than almost all of the EF lenses.

I am very confident the RF lenses are going to provide superior optical qualities over the current EF and L series lineup.

Sony messed up because they did not take advantage by creating a mount that is close and large like the new Nikon and Canon mounts.

If Sony had created a mount large and close to the sensor they would be mopping the floor on Canon and Nikon lenses.
Sony G series lenses are not even close to the sharper of Canon lenses.
It's hilarious to see Sony users using Canon lenses too.

It was definitely a hard choice for Canon since they have so much invested in the EF lenses. RFs will coexist until DSLRs are obsolete.

Simply put, RF are optimized for mirroless lenses just like EFM are optimized for APSC.
We will still have the ability to use EF lenses but we need accept that if we want the best quality we have to go with the native mounts.

MY BEEF WITH CANON

THEY NEED TO GET IN LINE AND OFFER INBODY IMAGE STABILIZATION LIKE THE OTHER MANUFACTURERS AND INVEST MORE ON EFM LENSES.

EX. EFM 50MM 1.4
EFM 50-135 F2
 

AJ

EOS 7D MK II
Sep 11, 2010
605
10
So a 28-70/2 won't mount on an M-series camera. Who cares. It seems like small price to pay to have EF compatible with the R series.
In hindsight, Canon could have made the M-series with a mount similar to the R-series so that the M-series would accept EF, EF-S, EF-R and EF-M, all without adapters. I think this would have required a larger mount than the current one.
 

dak723

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
434
I do not understand the strategy at all. They at the same time will announce highest end EF Superteles (after releasing very expensive TS Lenses recently), high end RF lenses and a higher end EF-M lens. So i do not see which mount will be obsolete next.

Generally, i would say the lower end EF-M and EF-S lenses and bodies can be obsoleted the easiest, without upsetting customers (as the Nikon 1). Most users have a single body with kit lens, which they will replace by a new kit at given time, by a Smartphone maybe.

EF-S is maybe even less relevant, this lenses can be used on M, and on RF it's less relevent, who buys a FF camera to use it in crop mode.

EF-R is the new line, and they come with some offers that look serious. It should stay in future

EF could be replaced by EF-R over time, depending on the success of the new mount. EF is usable on EF-R and a mount conversion service for the newer/more expensive lenses would be thinkable.

But anyways, as a heavily invested EF User, i feel somehow frustrated. My mount could get obsolete, my lenses loosing value much faster than planed, my bodies not beeing suitable for the newest lenses. This is emotional of course, but at the moment i am not in mood for money spending, so better use what i have, knowing that my skills will be the limiting factor for ever. But it kills the GAS, and in some years i might be no longer using my old gear, and buy a entry level compact camera, in G9 style maybe (or a better phone)

In opposit to the FD > EF Transition, this now not promises so much progress. mirrorless by itself may be a hype, but it does not make my pics better. Autofocus did and the digital development was fast these days. It's not comparable.
I see no reason to believe that mirrorless (and the new R system) will REPLACE DSLRs and EF lenses. Certainly not in the near future (meaning 10 years or more). As long as a fairly large percentage of people like OVFs better (and better battery life - meaning most birders, sports shooters and wildlife folks) the DSLR and the EF lines will continue. The fact that Canon continues to make new EF lenses is evidence that they have no plans to replace EF with RF.

I also see no reason that M series cameras can't be larger and fill the niche that an 80D or 7D user will want in mirrorless. They will use M lenses or EF lenses with adapter. RF lenses will be for FF only. That keeps it simple. Two mirrorless systems with their own lenses. Two DSLR systems with the existing EF and EF-S lenses.
 

psolberg

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 8, 2012
617
13
yup. Pretty much what me and others said repeatedly when we saw a 20mm registration distance. It is not a new argument but at least it is the first time I see somebody point it out outside of a forum. I guess the honey moon is over and people are starting to realize...oh crap it doesn't fit R lenses on my M and vice versa. Canon releasing a new M lens at least indicates they aren't done with M...yet...

But as pointed in the article, Sony's 7D/M5 killer will just mount everything in the E mount ecosystem, full frame or not day one. Presumably Nikon will not make another mount. This is key for they can just re-use Z's mount for cropped bodies and let them mount Z glass w/o needing adapters allowing them to focus on FF Z glass before playing around with cropped sensor smaller lenses. The cameras may be a bit bigger than Sony's as a result of the 55mm throat but IMO that's MUCH more preferable than outright locking you out from your next gen FFM lenses....and I really want to see a small crop sensor camera mount the 58mm f/0.95 NOCT...just because...it can ;)
 
Aug 30, 2018
1
0
I have some thoughts on this because I also reached this conclusion after reading the "specs" we're all taking as fact.

1.) There isn't a single lens on the EF-M mount I would want to adapt on a full-frame sensor and then crop in. It's no secret that the 22mm is a great little lens, but beyond that, only the 11-22mm is really anything special. I have the M50 for size and convenience. It's a somewhat pocketable 80D and it's what I use it as exclusively. I pack a full roller bag when I travel for work and can slip the M50 with the 22mm almost anywhere. The M lineup of lenses...or lack there of, have all shared a focus on size over performance. It's honestly what I like about it. Sure, faster lenses would be nice, but with more light comes more heft. It's fine if they wish to offer larger, faster lenses...but it doesn't appear that Canon is considering that with zooms any time soon.

2.) If these rumors hold true, Canon will now be selling lenses for four different camera mounts - EF-S, EF-M, EF, and RF. The only true discrepancy in this lineup is that the two mirrorless camera mounts won't play together...I'm sure Canon has looked at its lens sales and understands it's not really missing out on very many cross platform support. As mentioned above, Canon full-frame was never able to work with EF-S lenses. But, you have now lost the upgrade path of buying a crop sensor body and investing in full-frame lenses to upgrade over time. You can no longer do this in the mirrorless ecosystem

What does this mean for the future of the EOS-M mount? Like others have said, I really hope they maintain a priority of keeping the M system as compact as possible. God knows that the RF 28-70 and 50mm f/1.2 won't be. If you want a light, consumer/prosumer camera to take on vacation, shoot video or vlog with, the EOS-M series is your ticket. If you're looking for a professional mirrorless system, the RF cameras is your choice.

I admit, this creates concerns for the future of the M-mount. But I'm extremely happy they didn't try to force the mount to work with full-frame and make sacrifices in capabilities, performance and the future overall.
Absolutely agree. I have an M5 with full complement of EOS M lenses. Use for people and landscapes. Easy to carry and work with. I also have FF and APC bodies and lenses for Wildlife and birds. Two different beasts. The M5 and adapter is a backup body for the others.
 

psolberg

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 8, 2012
617
13
So a 28-70/2 won't mount on an M-series camera. Who cares. It seems like small price to pay to have EF compatible with the R series.
In hindsight, Canon could have made the M-series with a mount similar to the R-series so that the M-series would accept EF, EF-S, EF-R and EF-M, all without adapters. I think this would have required a larger mount than the current one.
that would result on M cameras being also deeper because of the 44mm flange distance requirement to remove all adapters as you suggest. The reality is that you don't have to go to this extreme: all you needed to do, if you decide to introduce a new mount is consider supporting both sensors sizes properly, unlike canon/sony did :). Sony just rammed the FF sensor in and they are pretty cramped there now, but they avoided a 2 mirrorless mount problem similar to canon's today. Canon obviously went the other direction and ended up with two incompatible mounts for each sensor. Nikon, having always supported cropped and full frame backwards and forwards regardless of body type with the F mount (they call it FX/DX), did the right thing form the start: big throat for very fast FF lenses, and pushed it all the way to 16mm so that most optical designs can either be adapted (included EF glass), or repurposed, such as any lens made by the sigmas of the world for existing mirrorless systems...even M4/3s (not that you'd want but you could...) These would not be adapted, just re-released as Z-compatible similarly to how they do today for EF and F mounts. It is the same design, just different housing. Off course Nikon being...Nikon hasn't released the new high speed BUS spec of the Z mount and I read this interview where the executive basically said: "they'll reverse engineer it anyway", they being, Sigma and the rest.

I assume Nikon, like Sony has, and if there is a market, release new APS-C mirrorless lenses. I doubt we'll see much action now with all the focus being FFM, but nothing stops them. Hell, golden opportunity here for the "other guys" to bring cropped sensor lenses to an APS-C...Z body, specially if they are just repurposed sony E 3rd party lenses.
 
Last edited:

Bambel

EOS M50
Jun 12, 2018
32
25
yup. Pretty much what me and others said repeatedly when we saw a 20mm registration distance. It is not a new argument but at least it is the first time I see somebody point it out outside of a forum. I guess the honey moon is over and people are starting to realize...oh crap it doesn't fit R lenses on my M and vice versa. Canon releasing a new M lens at least indicates they aren't done with M...yet...
I think the 32/1.4 indicates that Canon now sees the M market mature enough to move it up a bit, but stay true to the smal-light-cheap mantra. It's a separate marked similar to what other crop systems offer. Use EF if you want to via a simple adapter and thats it. (But even a EF 50/1.8 looks redicoulus on a M.)

RF is for people who want a step up from crop but if you're at this point you want better glas anyway. I guess over the years more non-L will be seen, but it's clever to start this way, so you get yor R&D back faster. I wouldn't be surprised if RF lenses stay rather shortish for quite some time but there will be more affordable lenses.

EF-S lenses cover moste of the range that can be made really smaller, lighter and cheaper than similar FF lenses and the bodies are cheaper also. Not everybody can or wants to spend thousands of €/$/.. for kilos of gear when they can get not much less image quality for a fraction of size and price. And a lot of people will and want to stick to an OVF. I see no large gaps in Canons EF-S lineup, so development will be slow, but today everything is covered between 10-250mm on different pricepoints. A STM here and a Mk II update there and thats it.

That leaves EF and the beauty of it is that it fits flawless on ALL of the above mentioned cameras/mounts. So think about it's future..

B.

PS: EF is sort of the "short flange distance" hype in reverse: you can fit it on a LOT of things.
 
Last edited:

psolberg

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 8, 2012
617
13
I think the 32/1.4 indicates that Canon now sees the M market mature enough to move it up a bit, but stay true to the smal-light-cheap mantra. It's a separate marked similar to what other crop systems offer. Use EF if you want to via a simple adapter and thats it. (But even a EF 50/1.8 looks redicoulus on a M.)

RF is for people who want a step up from crop but if you're at this point you want better glas anyway. I guess over the years more non-L will be seen, but it's clever to start this way, so you get yor R&D back faster. I wouldn't be surprised if RF lenses stay rather shortish for quite some time but there will be more affordable lenses.

EF-S lenses cover moste of the range that can be made really smaller, lighter and cheaper than similar FF lenses and the bodies are cheaper also. Not everybody can or wants to spend thousands of €/$/.. for kilos of gear when they can get not much less image quality for a fraction of size and price. And a lot of people will and want to stick to an OVF. I see no large gaps in Canons EF-S lineup, so development will be slow, but today everything is covered between 10-250mm on different pricepoints. A STM here and a Mk II update there and thats it.

That leaves EF and the beauty of it is that it fits flawless on ALL of the above mentioned cameras/mounts. So think about it's future..

B.

PS: EF is sort of the "short flange distance" hype in reverse: you can fit it on a LOT of things.
CR admin pointed out that if strategy is a concern, you're not accounting for people who start with cropped sensor but invest in FF lenses to eventually migrate into. So if you buy an M and bought that 35 1.8 R macro, you could just use it as it had been the case with EF-S/EF or Nikon's DX/FX or sony's E/FE...

well not now, because that R glass isn't going to work on your M. That's just an observation. You can agree/disagree. You can attribute whatever strategy you want to the choices canon made.
 

canonnews

EOS RP
Dec 27, 2017
227
111
Canada
www.canonnews.com
I added an addendum to the article because things were getting a bit crazy, to be honest, i didn't expect my musings to attract such attention, not to mention spurious insults directed my way for having the nerve to mention that Canon created a bit of a problem that they need to explain. It's been a fun 24 or so hours :)

Addendum

It seems like this article has caused quite the furor across the internet.

This wasn't an article saying that Canon made a huge mistake and that they are stupid. I'm sure there was a massive amount of discussions in Canon Inc over the potential solutions to this problem, and it wouldn't even surprise me if the final choice wasn't made until the very last minute. This article was written as my opinion, especially as someone that actively uses the EF-M system and loves its portability and versatility all packed into the small size of the EOS-M system. However, like many that have purchased an M5 (or an M6), the lure of a better more feature rich, better sealed camera body is something that at least I wish for. I would also still wish to use existing mirrorless lenses. In a perfect world I would also want to use mirrorless optimized RF lenses as well. This should come as no surprise to anyone. It's not a unique request, and it's one that Sony, for instance, handles gracefully.

I personally feel that Canon over time needs to phase out the EF-M, EF-S, and EF lineup and concentrate on RF lenses for both full frame and crop APS-C. Canon's main competitor in this field, Sony, allows for seamless utilization across APS-C and full frame cameras for all their lenses from their lowly APS-C consumer lenses to their super GM series lenses. What I am identifying - is that this is now missing from Canon's lineup the way it stands today. It’s a bit of a mess, and it’s one of Canon’s own decision making, no one else.

I hope this article continues to create some debate, and in the days ahead after Canon releases the EOS R and the related RF mount, that some questions are presented to Canon asking to clarify the direction of the EF-M, EF-S and EF systems.

No, the sky is not falling but it's cloudy with a chance of rain.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Don Macfarlane