The Canon EOS M5 Mark II and Canon EOS M6 Mark II are on the way [CR1]

amorse

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2017
417
398
www.flickr.com
I am not being a Canon apologist, not for one second. I am trying to be a realist and point out the desperate hand wringing over 'the issue' is largely overblown and grossly exaggerated.

Of course it should be included, but it isn't and for most people most of the time it genuinely makes no difference.
I'm no cinematographer, and I don't have a lot of issues with Canon's camera equipment, but the absence of 24 fps in the RP did strike me as a bit concerning considering the limitations it could cause for flickering and my (maybe misguided?) perception that adding 24 fps shouldn't come with any further technical limitations already in place with 30 fps. Why leave it out if there is no technical barrier or added cost to add it in (again, I'm assuming there isn't a technical limitation)? I've always been of the opinion that Canon seems to leave things out because those things aren't technically possible for Canon at the moment without notable compromises, or it is possible but would drive the price of the camera up considerably. I've never bought into the idea that Canon intentionally held back features to protect one line over another, and that's why the 24p issue rubbed me the wrong way - I had no idea why it wasn't included.

I won't suggest that the issue isn't overblown (it is definitely overblown), but in the context of what is good enough for most people most of the time, one could just as easily argue that a cell phone camera that produces 4k footage is more than good enough for most people most of the time - overkill even. We could even go not quite as far and say full frame video is overkill too - "just get an APS-C camera with 1080/24p if it's so important". But for those willing to invest in a full frame camera and full frame glass for video, I think it is safe to assume that those people are more likely to want some level of specific control over the way their video footage looks that they can't get elsewhere (hence their investment), and good enough for most people may not be good enough for them. I completely understand why the issue came up - the RP is so close to being a perfect solution for people who want full frame video at a low price, but omitting 24p in 1080, yet giving you 24p in 4k makes no reasonable sense.
 

Ricardo_fon

I'm New Here
Mar 19, 2019
12
6
The M5/M6 exist SOLELY for the reason that Smartphones DO NOT HAVE (i.e. NOT TODAY! But coming soon!) the requisite image quality and perception of depth that a larger sensor has.
I don't know about this Harry. The benefits of the camera are more than just image quality. I own an M5, my wife an M6. I was shooting Fuji before but it's easier to share a system.

This works because I'm not a pro photographer, but as a graphic designer the camera offers me a few things I need. I spend a lot of time doing street photography. So the 22mm, small size and control dials are important.

I also get a few jobs a year where I need to do product shots in a make shift studio. So hot shoe for controlling strobes and availability of lenses is important. One little camera can do alot of work for me.

My wife chose the M6 because of availability of control dials, hot shoe and proper tripod mount. She likes doing still lifes and landscapes.

I'm glad we went Canon because of 2nd hand lens availability and lens rental availability for when I need it. Something that's a struggle with Fuji. Even if a phone had an apsc sensor in it, it wouldn't be useful to me. At the same time I have no need or want for a FF system. As long as my M5 works I'll keep using it. But I really want canon to continue supporting the system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974 and Pape

Ricardo_fon

I'm New Here
Mar 19, 2019
12
6
I can't imagine why anyone would prefer an M over one of FujiFIlm's little "pocket rockets" but they do. Just another one of life's mysteries I suppose.
I was with Fuji before. Lenses are more affordable on Canons side (not apples with apples, but I couldn't afford the Fuji glass I wanted). Also more variety of lenses available to rent which I can adapt when needed. The only thing I miss from my xpro is build quality and that the camera is actually able go into sleep mode while you carry it.
 

Jack Jian

I'm New Here
Feb 14, 2018
14
14
I'm no cinematographer, and I don't have a lot of issues with Canon's camera equipment, but the absence of 24 fps in the RP did strike me as a bit concerning considering the limitations it could cause for flickering and my (maybe misguided?) perception that adding 24 fps shouldn't come with any further technical limitations already in place with 30 fps. Why leave it out if there is no technical barrier or added cost to add it in (again, I'm assuming there isn't a technical limitation)? I've always been of the opinion that Canon seems to leave things out because those things aren't technically possible for Canon at the moment without notable compromises, or it is possible but would drive the price of the camera up considerably. I've never bought into the idea that Canon intentionally held back features to protect one line over another, and that's why the 24p issue rubbed me the wrong way - I had no idea why it wasn't included.

I won't suggest that the issue isn't overblown (it is definitely overblown), but in the context of what is good enough for most people most of the time, one could just as easily argue that a cell phone camera that produces 4k footage is more than good enough for most people most of the time - overkill even. We could even go not quite as far and say full frame video is overkill too - "just get an APS-C camera with 1080/24p if it's so important". But for those willing to invest in a full frame camera and full frame glass for video, I think it is safe to assume that those people are more likely to want some level of specific control over the way their video footage looks that they can't get elsewhere (hence their investment), and good enough for most people may not be good enough for them. I completely understand why the issue came up - the RP is so close to being a perfect solution for people who want full frame video at a low price, but omitting 24p in 1080, yet giving you 24p in 4k makes no reasonable sense.
Seems you lose the concept of segmentation (Canon has the largest segmentation - xxxxD, xxxD, xxD, xD, M6, M5, R series:

1. RP is an entry level FF, targeted at FF beginners or vlogers or whatever at that level. 30fps is excellent and shows no difference to people viewing it: smartphone / Laptop / PC screen. None of major chunk of target population will even know what's 24fps, so it's fine. Do I want it, absolutely, but I understand market segmentation, and lack of 24fps is not at all an issue. Shooting at the right shutter (1/60 or 50) and reducing in PP also simulates 24fps look very well (doesn't affect lip sync when mixing as online"experts" claims. reducing the shutter a little bit also removes flickering, which not destroying the look. Whatever it is - Market Segmentation, and target users and their audience!

2. "...But for those willing to invest in a full frame camera and full frame glass for video,.." - Again, segmentation, "those" have already many other option and RP is not one of them, if they absolutely need "24fps" in 1080p.

3. 24p in 4k - could be sensor limitation preventing it to add 6 more frames per second - with that bad rolling shutter + lower buffer.
 

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,234
158
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
O.k., I will wait another 6 weeks or so until I buy a 2nd M50 ... or a M5 mk ii! On my last journey I had a M50 and M + EF-M 32 and EF 70 200 4.0 IS mark i with adapter with me: A great combo but it is much better to have TWO IDENTICAL bodies or at least two similar bodies - M50 and M are not similar except maybe in IQ if you have lots of light and enough time for AF and a simple subject.

Hopefully the anticipated M5 mark ii is at least similar to the M50 in terms of basic operation. Looking forward to that camera. And hopefully the microphone input/sound recording for movies is (1) low noise and (2) Linear PCM. The audio files from the TASCAM DR-70 with a matched stereo pair from RODE (M5) on its SD card are very good - if I feed the sound into the M50 microphone input the sound quality is mediocre: I would like to skip the synchronization in postprocess!
 
  • Like
Reactions: heart+eyes

canonical

EOS 80D
Jul 3, 2019
103
82
I can't imagine why anyone would prefer an M over one of FujiFIlm's little "pocket rockets" but they do. Just another one of life's mysteries I suppose.
simple. price : value. Fuji charges about 80% of FF price for half-frame gear, cameras and lenses. EOS M delivers same IQ with less bulk and at considerably lower cost. Especially M50 is a price-value winner. And it beats Fuji x-t100 hands-down. Same with EF-M lenses. Fuji X lenses are more expensive and bulkier yet none of them beats IQ of EF-M 22/2.0, 28/3.5, 32/1.4 or 11-22. and the dirt-cheap EF-M 55-200 may be regarded low even by some CR forum dwellers, but it is a hell of a lot better than its sorry Fuji competitor XC 55-230/6.7 at twice the price. lol

little bang for the buck is what limits fuji to less than 10% market share. most potential customers obviously know aperture rings and hipster-appeal are not needed to create great images.
 

jolyonralph

Kodak Brownie
Aug 25, 2015
1,087
294
49
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
It will be interesting to see how many Sigma EF-M primes get bought. They do complement slow zooms very nicely. Between Canon and Sigma, there will be a fair number of zooms to choose from.
Hope Sigma have better luck at decoding the EF-M format than Tamron did. They gave up with EF-M mount after their disastrous 18-200 EF-M lens which continually needed firmware upgrades to allow it to keep working. Bet you anything the Tamron 18-200 won't work on the new EOS M cameras.
 

HarryFilm

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 6, 2016
416
30
I don't know about this Harry. The benefits of the camera are more than just image quality. I own an M5, my wife an M6. I was shooting Fuji before but it's easier to share a system.

This works because I'm not a pro photographer, but as a graphic designer the camera offers me a few things I need. I spend a lot of time doing street photography. So the 22mm, small size and control dials are important.

I also get a few jobs a year where I need to do product shots in a make shift studio. So hot shoe for controlling strobes and availability of lenses is important. One little camera can do alot of work for me.

My wife chose the M6 because of availability of control dials, hot shoe and proper tripod mount. She likes doing still lifes and landscapes.

I'm glad we went Canon because of 2nd hand lens availability and lens rental availability for when I need it. Something that's a struggle with Fuji. Even if a phone had an apsc sensor in it, it wouldn't be useful to me. At the same time I have no need or want for a FF system. As long as my M5 works I'll keep using it. But I really want canon to continue supporting the system.

---

YOU are the PRIME MARKET for the M5/M6 replacements as they are small, lightweight, will take more-than-decent photos and you probably DO NOT want to spend big bucks on a 7D-series or higher! Again, the M5/M6 will sell very well to people just like you and your wife!

NOW.... the fly-in-the-ointment will become VERY apparent once large sensor (i.e. 2/3rds inch and APS-C) super-smartphones come out that have POWERFUL CPU processors (i.e. Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 and better!) that can do a LOT of on-board Pixel-3 or Huaweii P30 like photo processing and computational photography tasks what will MAKE your photos conform-to and/or actually become professional level with a minimum of fuss!

Once that happens ALL manufacturers (Canon included!) ABSOLUTELY WILL need to change their product lineup and pricing schemes in order to compete with products that will BLEED over 90% of their point-n-shoot or mid-range camera business away from their bottom lines. While I do have SOME VERY SPECIFIC INSIDER KNOWLEDGE of what is coming out very soon now in terms of large-sensor smartphones, I am STILL confused as to what Canon is thinking about doing business-wise to counteract devices that are BOTH very portable pro-level cameras AND portable personal supercomputers!

.
We live in VERY interesting times and while the M5/M6 replacements are more-than-decent in their own right, they are merely unstable footholds for staying with old technology rather than a means to march into the future!

IT'S COMING !!!! The merging of computational photography, large low-noise image sensors AND supercomputer-level smartphones WILL BE A REALITY VERY SOON !!! So WHAT is Canon going to DO ABOUT THAT ABSOLUTE FACT ??? !!!

.
 
Last edited:

Isaacheus

EOS RP
Jun 22, 2017
200
12
New Zealand
Seems you lose the concept of segmentation (Canon has the largest segmentation - xxxxD, xxxD, xxD, xD, M6, M5, R series:

1. RP is an entry level FF, targeted at FF beginners or vlogers or whatever at that level. 30fps is excellent and shows no difference to people viewing it: smartphone / Laptop / PC screen. None of major chunk of target population will even know what's 24fps, so it's fine. Do I want it, absolutely, but I understand market segmentation, and lack of 24fps is not at all an issue. Shooting at the right shutter (1/60 or 50) and reducing in PP also simulates 24fps look very well (doesn't affect lip sync when mixing as online"experts" claims. reducing the shutter a little bit also removes flickering, which not destroying the look. Whatever it is - Market Segmentation, and target users and their audience!

2. "...But for those willing to invest in a full frame camera and full frame glass for video,.." - Again, segmentation, "those" have already many other option and RP is not one of them, if they absolutely need "24fps" in 1080p.

3. 24p in 4k - could be sensor limitation preventing it to add 6 more frames per second - with that bad rolling shutter + lower buffer.
I understand what your getting at with segmentation, but it still is a strange choice overall - removing an option that older cameras have, and which wouldn't appear to cost any extra, just seems like omitting something because they can.

If they were looking for meaningful segmentation, wouldn't adding a higher fps option for the higher cameras be far better? Ie 120 at 1080 on the r, but leave it out of the rp.

It feels a bit like if Canon decided to leave out m-raw on the next 5dsr release, but kept s-raw. Not something that will affect everyone that uses it, but it'd feel Canon were removing something for the sake of it
 
Jul 24, 2019
2
0
Surely that would just be the APS-C version of EOS RP, with RF mount not M mount.
I didn't say it would have the same specs. Just the same body size and shape with an M mount on it. Hopefully it would have specs that would make it worth buying.

As I said, ibis and specially weather sealing are a must at that price point.
 

amorse

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2017
417
398
www.flickr.com
Seems you lose the concept of segmentation (Canon has the largest segmentation - xxxxD, xxxD, xxD, xD, M6, M5, R series:

1. RP is an entry level FF, targeted at FF beginners or vlogers or whatever at that level. 30fps is excellent and shows no difference to people viewing it: smartphone / Laptop / PC screen. None of major chunk of target population will even know what's 24fps, so it's fine. Do I want it, absolutely, but I understand market segmentation, and lack of 24fps is not at all an issue. Shooting at the right shutter (1/60 or 50) and reducing in PP also simulates 24fps look very well (doesn't affect lip sync when mixing as online"experts" claims. reducing the shutter a little bit also removes flickering, which not destroying the look. Whatever it is - Market Segmentation, and target users and their audience!

2. "...But for those willing to invest in a full frame camera and full frame glass for video,.." - Again, segmentation, "those" have already many other option and RP is not one of them, if they absolutely need "24fps" in 1080p.

3. 24p in 4k - could be sensor limitation preventing it to add 6 more frames per second - with that bad rolling shutter + lower buffer.
I don't think I've lost the concept of segmentation at all. In fact, I'm well aware of Canon's segmentation in their lineup and don't disagree with it. I do believe that getting more advanced features is worth more money and have no issue with that. But suggesting that the 23.976 frame rate aka 24p was removed as a way to segment the rp from it's competitors in Canon's stable is seems like purposefully removing a standard feature. Here's a few of Canon's other cameras that can do 24p at 1080: SL2, t7, t7i, 80d, 77d, 70d, 7D, 7Dii, 6D, 6Dii, 5Dii, 5Diii, 5Div, EOS R, etc. Even the 4000D, Canon's cheapest DSLR, can do 24p at 1080. Based on that list I'm confident that Canon has even more cameras that can do it, I'm just tired of verifying each camera one at a time. I really have a hard time thinking than Canon is using the lack of 1080/24 on the RP as a way to protect all those other cameras. Having this seetting as an option on what seems to be every other DSLR or mirrorless they make (below or above the RP in Canon's segmentation) indicates that it should be considered a standard feature.

My point is that most of Canon's segmentation is based on adding hardware (which adds cost), or new tech (which is unavailable at lower segmented camera bodies). This is neither - it's removal of a standard feature which removes no cost, and is available in ever other ILC Canon makes.

Further, video isn't something I worry about a lot as I'm really just a stills photographer. My issue here is that removal of 24 at 1080 is out of character for Canon as there is no reasonable excuse for doing so. I think we can explain away other missing features from any camera Canon makes with good sense: i.e. 4k uncropped on full frame was not feasible with proper heat management and weather sealing, or adding a second card slot to the R would add cost - those things make sense. Omission of 24p at 1080 does not make sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Isaacheus

mustafa

EOS T7i
Jul 20, 2012
78
1
---

YOU are the PRIME MARKET for the M5/M6 replacements as they are small, lightweight, will take more-than-decent photos and you probably DO NOT want to spend big bucks on a 7D-series or higher! Again, the M5/M6 will sell very well to people just like you and your wife!

NOW.... the fly-in-the-ointment will become VERY apparent once large sensor (i.e. 2/3rds inch and APS-C) super-smartphones come out that have POWERFUL CPU processors (i.e. Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 and better!) that can do a LOT of on-board Pixel-3 or Huaweii P30 like photo processing and computational photography tasks what will MAKE your photos conform-to and/or actually become professional level with a minimum of fuss!

Once that happens ALL manufacturers (Canon included!) ABSOLUTELY WILL need to change their product lineup and pricing schemes in order to compete with products that will BLEED over 90% of their point-n-shoot or mid-range camera business away from their bottom lines. While I do have SOME VERY SPECIFIC INSIDER KNOWLEDGE of what is coming out very soon now in terms of large-sensor smartphones, I am STILL confused as to what Canon is thinking about doing business-wise to counteract devices that are BOTH very portable pro-level cameras AND portable personal supercomputers!

.
We live in VERY interesting times and while the M5/M6 replacements are more-than-decent in their own right, they are merely unstable footholds for staying with old technology rather than a means to march into the future!

IT'S COMING !!!! The merging of computational photography, large low-noise image sensors AND supercomputer-level smartphones WILL BE A REALITY VERY SOON !!! So WHAT is Canon going to DO ABOUT THAT ABSOLUTE FACT ??? !!!

.
Could you stop SHOUTING at us please Harry?
 
  • Love
Reactions: pj1974

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,600
673
119
I can't imagine why anyone would prefer an M over one of FujiFIlm's little "pocket rockets" but they do. Just another one of life's mysteries I suppose.
System compatibility. I can carry an M and use the lenses I have with me as a backup. Flash system, I can use my extensive flash system with the M. If I want to use an exotic lens for some special purpose I already have it. For many users even batteries and chargers are interchangeable.

That kind of think is very difficult to put a value on but makes the experience of living with a system very different. When I transitioned to EOS from FD I was carrying two systems, I swore off ever doing that again!
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
270
211
117
Williamsport, PA
I'm no cinematographer, and I don't have a lot of issues with Canon's camera equipment, but the absence of 24 fps in the RP did strike me as a bit concerning considering the limitations it could cause for flickering and my (maybe misguided?) perception that adding 24 fps shouldn't come with any further technical limitations already in place with 30 fps. Why leave it out if there is no technical barrier or added cost to add it in (again, I'm assuming there isn't a technical limitation)? I've always been of the opinion that Canon seems to leave things out because those things aren't technically possible for Canon at the moment without notable compromises, or it is possible but would drive the price of the camera up considerably. I've never bought into the idea that Canon intentionally held back features to protect one line over another, and that's why the 24p issue rubbed me the wrong way - I had no idea why it wasn't included.

I won't suggest that the issue isn't overblown (it is definitely overblown), but in the context of what is good enough for most people most of the time, one could just as easily argue that a cell phone camera that produces 4k footage is more than good enough for most people most of the time - overkill even. We could even go not quite as far and say full frame video is overkill too - "just get an APS-C camera with 1080/24p if it's so important". But for those willing to invest in a full frame camera and full frame glass for video, I think it is safe to assume that those people are more likely to want some level of specific control over the way their video footage looks that they can't get elsewhere (hence their investment), and good enough for most people may not be good enough for them. I completely understand why the issue came up - the RP is so close to being a perfect solution for people who want full frame video at a low price, but omitting 24p in 1080, yet giving you 24p in 4k makes no reasonable sense.
Canon does make FF camera and FF glass for superb video.
 

H. Jones

Photojournalist
Aug 1, 2014
228
27
Maybe a high-end APS-C with RF mount without APS-C lenses, but that does not make much sense.
I think something that gets neglected in these conversations are the 1.3x APS-H sensor cameras. They were always full frame mount, but had smaller sensors. I don't think it's totally beyond the realm of possibility that Canon would release a 1.6x crop RF mount in the same vein as the 1.3x APS-H. 1.3x crop never made much sense to me as it wasn't that far off from full frame, which I think is why Canon got rid of it, but I could really see them making something 1.6x.

This is kinda a reach, but I'd also note the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS works out to a 24-56mm f/2.8L IS on a crop.. That's kinda a really sweet general use lens for a crop camera.
 

cayenne

EOR R
Mar 28, 2012
1,876
89
But 4k still remains 24fps only, they only remove it from 1080p.

That being said, it is probably a flagship mirrorless APS-C model with a new sensor, so they will probably bring them back, and the price will be higher than what people expect.
Hm.......so, wouldn't the solution be to shoot 4K at 24fps and crop that down into 1080?

I thought that's what most folks with 4K capable cameras did these days when wanting to export to 1080?

cayenne
 

canonnews

EOS RP
Dec 27, 2017
257
156
Canada
www.canonnews.com
I can't imagine why anyone would prefer an M over one of FujiFIlm's little "pocket rockets" but they do. Just another one of life's mysteries I suppose.
The fuji's aren't pocket rockets by the time you add on lenses. the canon M lenses while slow, are small, light, optically good (most times), and inexpensive - and they also respond well to DLO which you get for free.
 
  • Like
Reactions: canonical

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
344
140
I love my M5. If they release a mkii I won't upgrade, but I'll feel better about buying more lenses. I'd really like that 32, but don't wanna be bitten by them cancelling the system like Nikon did with their 1 system. Still sore about that.
The Nikon 1 was always a lame duck. I saw it when Nikon first introduced it. I was struck my the decidedly mediocre image quality, and somewhat clumsy handling. Apparently, a lot of people felt that way, and it never had particularly good sales.

The M series, on the other hand has been popular from the beginning, and has gained in popularity pretty much everywhere. Despite a number of writers, such as ThomHogan, saying that Canon needs an APS-C system with the same mount as the R series, I’m not so sure that’s true. With that mount, the camera will be larger, heavier, and likely more expensive.

The truth is that sizes smaller than full frame are shrinking (heh) in sales faster than full frame is—other than Canon’s M series, which is doing well, so why discontinue it? Possibly Canon might come out with an R mount APS-C, but this is a distinctive line with good sales, and I assume, at least a decent profitability. That’s rare these days.