Patent: Canon EF-M 10mm f/2.8 Fisheye

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,385
212
Germany
... It is as clear as day that the Canon guy is saying EOS R = FF. EOS M = APS-C. ...
It is not. None of us has the right to claim that your or my or another persepective of this is the truth or not.

And
  • if you read again what Craig said about this interview,
  • if you combine it with his [CR2] source, that there will/could be an APS-C EOS R body,
  • if you understand that this quote of the interview is not about what will be made or not, but about physical dimensions
  • if you understand that there is a relevant piece of market an EOS M cannot cover
  • if you understand that Canon is about running a company caring about gaining/keeping markets
then mayby you can agree that there is an aceptable high possibility of an APS-C EOS R body.
Not more, not less. And this is, what it's all about.
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
well, we have
a) a very clear unambiguous statement by a qualified Canon representative
b) a whole lot of conjecture, rumors and guessing

Guess, which one I go with?

And yes, of course it is about physical size. It does not make sense for Canon to make "large cameras with small sensors inside", when they already have large cameras with large sensor [EOS R] and small cameras with smaller sensors [EOS M] on offer.

I still think a "mirrorfree 7D III" in form an upcoming top-of-the-line EOS M model is more likely. But yes, to may knowledge no Canon guy has said something to that effect publicly.
 
Mar 14, 2012
2,231
128
well, we have
a) a very clear unambiguous statement by a qualified Canon representative
b) a whole lot of conjecture, rumors and guessing

Guess, which one I go with?

And yes, of course it is about physical size. It does not make sense for Canon to make "large cameras with small sensors inside", when they already have large cameras with large sensor [EOS R] and small cameras with smaller sensors [EOS M] on offer.

I still think a "mirrorfree 7D III" in form an upcoming top-of-the-line EOS M model is more likely. But yes, to may knowledge no Canon guy has said something to that effect publicly.

So what happens when EF lenses are no longer produced? Then you have RF and EF-M but you can't mount RF on EF-M. So what is more likely? Canon introduces RF-S and produces a limited line of RF-S lenses to supplement RF lenses just as it had with EF-S for EF. Or the EF-M ecosystem becomes like Fuji's with a lot of options in price and size because only EF-M lenses will mount on M cameras. I think Canon goes with RF-S. It requires a lot fewer lenses and resources, and Canon avoids developing two entire incompatible ecosystems. The M system will survive as it is now but it won't have a full lens ecosystem.
 

Photorex

EOS RP
Nov 19, 2016
220
22
And yes, of course it is about physical size. It does not make sense for Canon to make "large cameras with small sensors inside",
Why have they then done it in the not so distant past when there were also smaller cameras with smaller sensors (200D)available? Despite the 200D they built the bulky 80D with an APS-C sensor.
The 80D is similar in size to the EOS R and has an APS-C sensor. And the 80 D is also not much taller than the full frame 6DII.
80D_EOS-R.png
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,385
212
Germany
well, we have
a) a very clear unambiguous statement by a qualified Canon representative
Wrong!
This statement is not "very clear" not even "clear".
And the only "unambiguous" about this is that the Canon rep is refering to physical dimensions, but not to product lines and their further development.
But you seem to want to make it clear just to keep us others in motion and to keep your limited perspective alive.
This statement is not clear yet.
And you and I haven't been there. So nobody of us might know what got lost in translation as well.
Please just agree to accept this just as I agree that Canon really might think in the way you might think they do so.
Fullstop! (familiar name to you?)
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
@Maximilian - i agree we don't know what Canon will REALLY do in the end.

but what the Canon guy in the interview said was absolutely unambigous and as clear as speech can be. straight question, straight answer. no room for alternative interpretations.
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
The M system will survive as it is now but it won't have a full lens ecosystem.
yes. it does not need to. it is a system for those who prefer small and light and inexpensive. Which is not possible for longer tele lenses.

Canon wants to sell as many (higher priced) FF cameras and lenses as possible. And they offer a small & light system as a secondary, separate system for FF owners (they prefer us buying their M system rather than a crop system from Fuji or Sony) and for all those who prefer smaller/lighter/less expensive (rather than buying one from Fuji or Sony).

same as in the DSLR days. Sony went with 1 mount for mirrorfree, Nikon is open (whether they will or won't offer crop-sensor mirrorfree at all and if so, with "bigger than necessary" Z mount), Canon had 2 mounts and will have 2 mounts and 2 lineups in the future.

only difference to EF/EF-S situation is that RF lenses dont fit M mount. no big deal from Canon's perspective and also from majority of users. "Rebel + EF-S kit zoom" buyers typically did not buy a lot of EF glass. and "Typical" EOS M buyers will also not be interested to mount RF 28-70/2.0 or future RF long teles - no matter whether EOS M is their only system or a second system in addition to EOS R.
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,385
212
Germany
... what the Canon guy in the interview said was absolutely unambigous and as clear as speech can be. straight question, straight answer. no room for alternative interpretations.
@4fun, please give me one last try:

As as side note:
Funny thing is that I am not into the 7D2 sucessor market and that I have no reason to fantasize about a mirrorless successor.

But I am intelligent enough to understand that if a Canon representive is asked
about EOS M and EOS R and how they fit in the Canon lineup (Google translated)
that he could also understand this question as "does the EOS M still have a place in the Canon lineup? (or will it be discontinued)".
And then he answers
Since EOS R is a full-size system, it can not be downsized to EOS M size. EOS M has a role/existence value as an APS-C system
meaning: "(dont worry!) EOS M will stay, because Canon cannot make EOS R as small as that."

And if some high ambitious prosumers want to make use of the high performance RF lenses and if they want to have the "reach" of an APS-C sensor, so why not give them A body with RF flange and an APS-C sensor and call it a 7D2 successor.
Why not? Just because it won't fit in your "EOS M must be the only Canon APS-C system" universe?

I don't get this narrowmindedness - sorry for calling you that. :cry:
 
Mar 14, 2012
2,231
128
...

only difference to EF/EF-S situation is that RF lenses dont fit M mount. no big deal from Canon's perspective and also from majority of users. "Rebel + EF-S kit zoom" buyers typically did not buy a lot of EF glass. and "Typical" EOS M buyers will also not be interested to mount RF 28-70/2.0 or future RF long teles - no matter whether EOS M is their only system or a second system in addition to EOS R.
And that is the biggest reason why Canon needs RF-S. Canon needs users of Canon APS-C to generate demand for their FF products, and that is most easily done when lenses can be used on multiple systems. It is easier for Canon to market to its APS-C users to migrate to FF than it is to convince Fuji/Sony/Nikon users to switch to Canon. The only way your argument makes sense is if Canon can convince a lot more of the Fuji/Sony/Nikon users to switch to Canon FF from whatever they're using. And given that Sony has grown based on luring away users from other systems, that argument has no weight.
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
nope. the old style "feeder thing" from APSC to FF is not needed any longer. EF-S was borne out of sheer necessity, because FF systems were prohibitively expensive for "average" new and existing customers (coming from analog SLR).

the difference is much smaller today and should/will shrink further with mirrorfree systems. i think we will see 999 for "entry level" FF ILCs pretty soon.

depending on preferences and available budget, buyers either chose small/light/inexpensive (crop) or larger/"better"/more expensive (full frame) ... or both.

and if someone starts with Canon EOS M and likes it, they are very likely to consider Canon as 1st choice if they want to add or move to an FF system. Even when it means buying new lenses. would they switch to a different brand the'd also have to buy new lenses ... and learn a different UI in addition ... and possibly switch forums. Sonyalpharumors, anyone? :)