Rumored Canon EOS M6 Mark II specifications [CR1]

amorse

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2017
600
652
www.instagram.com
Why the M6 over the M5? Wouldn't having a real viewfinder be preferred for most situations? I can't see squat when outside in the daytime.
Just curios as to the appeal for a finderless camera.
PS don't give me crap you can get a finder for the M6 as that comes with the M5 at no extra cost or effort and keeps the accessory shoe free for other things like a flash.
At one point I was considering the M6 as an emergency backup for my 5D IV, but in the end it didn't make sense (The R is a much better fit for my needs once all was considered). I liked the M6 because it had relatively good quality in a small form factor. I was most concerned about size and weight, and I almost never use the viewfinder (most of the images I take are on a tripod and in live view) so I wouldn't have missed it. In fact, the lack of a viewfinder was attractive to me because it cut back the size and squared off the whole unit.

Right now I take most of my favourite images on multi-day camping trips where I need to carry everything in, and won't have any chance to recharge batteries. The purpose of considering an M6 was if the 5D IV fails or breaks, at least I will still have a sensor which can be adapted to my EF lenses and can still take images of sufficient quality without breaking the bank (though with some clear limitations) and won't relatively add a lot of weight or take up a lot of space in a bag. As an example, I'll be doing a 7 day back country hiking trip this September, with no chance of charging my gear over that period, and everything will be carried over ~60k with lots of elevation change, in addition to food and camping gear. Having a very small very light backup camera which may not even get used, is better than carrying a backup which is a lot larger and heavier when the camera gear is competing for space in my bag with things I may need for safety or comfort. My fear is having the 5D fail on day 2, and then my photography/camping trip becomes just a camping trip pretty quickly.

In the end I decided the M6 wasn't a fit because it used a different battery - If the 5D failed early, I'd need at least 2 batteries (if not more) and that starts to eliminate the weight and size savings over something like an EOS R (which could just use the LP-E6Ns I brought for the 5D). The RP would have been perfect if it took an LP-E6N: smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the R; bigger sensor, higher IQ, better low light than the M6.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,258
1,894
Canada
It's not weird if their goal is small, light lenses for casual/amateur use. Not every system needs to address every need.
If you want the ultimate in quality, FF and big glass is hard to beat..... but it is terrible for portability.

The M line will never have the quality or ergonomics of even the lowest FF camera, but for price and portability it’s hard to beat. The lenses are slow because The target audience wants them small and inexpensive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: canonmike

criscokkat

EOS RP
Sep 26, 2017
313
286
Madison, WI
At one point I was considering the M6 as an emergency backup for my 5D IV, but in the end it didn't make sense (The R is a much better fit for my needs once all was considered). I liked the M6 because it had relatively good quality in a small form factor. I was most concerned about size and weight, and I almost never use the viewfinder (most of the images I take are on a tripod and in live view) so I wouldn't have missed it. In fact, the lack of a viewfinder was attractive to me because it cut back the size and squared off the whole unit.

Right now I take most of my favourite images on multi-day camping trips where I need to carry everything in, and won't have any chance to recharge batteries. The purpose of considering an M6 was if the 5D IV fails or breaks, at least I will still have a sensor which can be adapted to my EF lenses and can still take images of sufficient quality without breaking the bank (though with some clear limitations) and won't relatively add a lot of weight or take up a lot of space in a bag. As an example, I'll be doing a 7 day back country hiking trip this September, with no chance of charging my gear over that period, and everything will be carried over ~60k with lots of elevation change, in addition to food and camping gear. Having a very small very light backup camera which may not even get used, is better than carrying a backup which is a lot larger and heavier when the camera gear is competing for space in my bag with things I may need for safety or comfort. My fear is having the 5D fail on day 2, and then my photography/camping trip becomes just a camping trip pretty quickly.

In the end I decided the M6 wasn't a fit because it used a different battery - If the 5D failed early, I'd need at least 2 batteries (if not more) and that starts to eliminate the weight and size savings over something like an EOS R (which could just use the LP-E6Ns I brought for the 5D). The RP would have been perfect if it took an LP-E6N: smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the R; bigger sensor, higher IQ, better low light than the M6.
It sounds like you got the R as a backup, right? The size difference is not that much different than the RP once you add the needed EF adapter, and the weight difference is only an extra 140 grams. The biggest issue is the mirrorless needs more battery power. I'm wondering if it's efficient to carry 1 or 2 USB powerbanks and one of the small USB chargers some of which are not much bigger than a battery instead of lots of lp-e6's?.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,635
2,142
It sounds like you got the R as a backup, right? The size difference is not that much different than the RP once you add the needed EF adapter, and the weight difference is only an extra 140 grams. The biggest issue is the mirrorless needs more battery power. I'm wondering if it's efficient to carry 1 or 2 USB powerbanks and one of the small USB chargers some of which are not much bigger than a battery instead of lots of lp-e6's?.
The R is a great travel camera for me. I generally have my 15” MacBook Pro on trips, so I simply use the MBP power supply to charge the battery inside the EOS R.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amorse

amorse

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2017
600
652
www.instagram.com
It sounds like you got the R as a backup, right? The size difference is not that much different than the RP once you add the needed EF adapter, and the weight difference is only an extra 140 grams. The biggest issue is the mirrorless needs more battery power. I'm wondering if it's efficient to carry 1 or 2 USB powerbanks and one of the small USB chargers some of which are not much bigger than a battery instead of lots of lp-e6's?.
I actually didn't pick it up - I've been gambling that the 5D won't fail and I won't drop it off a cliff - so far so good. I decided to wait and see what the high resolution R looks like and if it's compelling and uses the same battery I'd consider that but treat the new camera as the primary and the 5D as the backup. May not be all that different from a weight/size perspective, but it could open new doors, give me the backup I'm after, and give me my eventual R mount transition path. Once that camera's announced officially I'll be able to see if it can work as I hope, and if not then the R will be perfect and maybe cheaper by then too. I figure I can be patient for now if I'm willing to bet my worst fears won't come true. We'll see!
 

Danglin52

EOS 80D
Aug 8, 2018
124
103
High-speed continuous shooting at a maximum of 16 FPS (with AE/AF)
RAW Burst mode at 30 FPS (with AE/AF)
4k 30p with no crop or pixel binning
Full HD up to 180p (I guess admin or source meant to say 180fps?)
All these are not even closer to normally what Canon delivers. Canon is a company even if they can do it technically they will not offer these in a camera at this level. Good amount of salt required here.
There is actually a chance for a big jump in technology this time since they are so far behind cameras like the the X T-3 & A7RIV. Canon needs to catch up a bit if they want to extend the life cycle of their products. If they can close some of the gaps with competitors, it could extend retention of their base 15-20 years and allow them to cycle back to profit vs innovation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FredEOS and Pape

CanonFanBoy

O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
4,571
2,400
Irving, Texas
The patent is for lens elements, not the lens housing. It could be the lenses in a PS camera with a sony 4/3 sensor. They've already used smaller sony sensors for other PowerShots.
Could also be misdirection by Canon, couldn't it? Example: If Canon develops a new switch design and submits it with a drawing of it installed on a 1DX Mark III, that doesn't mean Canon can only use it on a 1DX Mark III. Lenses might be different, but I have no idea. If the design is for a particular optical formula or something else, it would not necessarily have to be used on an M43 mount lens. I think M43 is open source (Is that the phrase to use here?). Again, I have no idea.
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
486
444
118
Williamsport, PA
At one point I was considering the M6 as an emergency backup for my 5D IV, but in the end it didn't make sense (The R is a much better fit for my needs once all was considered). I liked the M6 because it had relatively good quality in a small form factor. I was most concerned about size and weight, and I almost never use the viewfinder (most of the images I take are on a tripod and in live view) so I wouldn't have missed it. In fact, the lack of a viewfinder was attractive to me because it cut back the size and squared off the whole unit.

Right now I take most of my favourite images on multi-day camping trips where I need to carry everything in, and won't have any chance to recharge batteries. The purpose of considering an M6 was if the 5D IV fails or breaks, at least I will still have a sensor which can be adapted to my EF lenses and can still take images of sufficient quality without breaking the bank (though with some clear limitations) and won't relatively add a lot of weight or take up a lot of space in a bag. As an example, I'll be doing a 7 day back country hiking trip this September, with no chance of charging my gear over that period, and everything will be carried over ~60k with lots of elevation change, in addition to food and camping gear. Having a very small very light backup camera which may not even get used, is better than carrying a backup which is a lot larger and heavier when the camera gear is competing for space in my bag with things I may need for safety or comfort. My fear is having the 5D fail on day 2, and then my photography/camping trip becomes just a camping trip pretty quickly.

In the end I decided the M6 wasn't a fit because it used a different battery - If the 5D failed early, I'd need at least 2 batteries (if not more) and that starts to eliminate the weight and size savings over something like an EOS R (which could just use the LP-E6Ns I brought for the 5D). The RP would have been perfect if it took an LP-E6N: smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the R; bigger sensor, higher IQ, better low light than the M6.
I really didn't care for comparison to 5D or R it was M^ vs M5 not the litany you gave that was irrelevant.
 

Kharan

EOS M50
Nov 9, 2018
37
26
Could also be misdirection by Canon, couldn't it? Example: If Canon develops a new switch design and submits it with a drawing of it installed on a 1DX Mark III, that doesn't mean Canon can only use it on a 1DX Mark III. Lenses might be different, but I have no idea. If the design is for a particular optical formula or something else, it would not necessarily have to be used on an M43 mount lens. I think M43 is open source (Is that the phrase to use here?). Again, I have no idea.
Lenses are always made for a detector with a specific surface area. They could be used on smaller sensors, yes, but that's not the critical part - it's always the largest detector that an image circle might cover. It's much more likely that the lenses were designed for G1 XIII prototypes, until Canon eventually settled on the APS-C chip.

As for the rumored specs: LOL. One would need to be on some pretty hard drugs, or have absolutely zero knowledge of prior Canon products to believe it. I'd find it surprising if the new EOS M bodies could even shoot 10 FPS with AE and AF for more than three seconds, and incorporate cropped 4K with DPAF. The new sensor resolution seems legit, though.
 

amorse

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2017
600
652
www.instagram.com
I really didn't care for comparison to 5D or R it was M^ vs M5 not the litany you gave that was irrelevant.
It's certainly relevant to me - having no viewfinder is useful to me, but my use case for wanting that is specific. I tried to explain it, and I tend to be thorough. I'm sorry to have burdened you with my detailed response.
 

Aussie shooter

@brett.guy.photography
Dec 6, 2016
599
693
I would imagine that whatever sensor goes into the m6 will be the same that goes into the M5 mk2 and the 80d/7d2 replacement? Are there any other aps-c sensors in the pipeline from canon atm?
 

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,334
230
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
Sensor resolution is 32.5MP. The camera would should 4K with no crop and no binning. So the camera is going to record 4K by reading every 4th pixel (= skipping)?
You need 2x 3840 pixels width of the sensor to do that for 4k recordings. 32 MPixel are o.k. for 4k in 16:9 but not sufficient for the 3:2 (15:10) format. You need 2 x 3840 * ( 2/3 * 2 * 3840) = 8/3 * 3840² pixels or approx. 40 MPixels to do that.

And why throw information away? - I think it would be (moderately) easy to use sonsors 4 pixel groups to get the RGB values for one image pixel to gain sensitivity, DR and color depth. Much easier than scaling e.g. 6400 pixels to 3840 pixels (width).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,334
230
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
Hope they do something with the battery life also, those 200 shots rated tiny batteries are really not the best.
I bought a power supply for my M cameras consisting of a USB power supply (3A), a cable with 5V-8.4V converter and the dummy battery. I testet it with a 20000mAh 2.4A Power bank and it worked with my EOS M.
Next step will be an external power supply with two Li Ion cells (18650 with protection and micro usb charging port) which provide the 8.4 volts directly and sports a whopping 3400 mAh (4 x the LP-E12 battery energy content!). And if that works I will try to design a simple power grip for my EOS M50 - 1200 shots in ECO mode with one charge is a vast amount ...

EDIT:
LP-E12 from Canon is very good, no large improvement on this side.
Alternatively Canon shoud align the lens mount with the left side of the camera for a substantial battery. This gives 10...15mm more space on the right side to make a larger grip without narrowing the gap between grip and lens and but some electronics into the grip to keep sensor heat lower. The lens release button might reside on the left side of the camera.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: criscokkat

waldi72

I'm New Here
Dec 18, 2014
12
7
Few years ago Canon bought Toshiba Medical. What if they also got some help from Toshiba for its processors technology? It would explain big jump in processing speed of new M6.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SecureGSM

wsmith96

Advancing Amateur
Aug 17, 2012
923
17
Texas
The rumored specs look good. I’d be happy if they left the mp at 24 and kept the other specs. Perhaps I should reconsider the lenses I have up for sale...