any new rumors for the next EF-M lens?

[ad]

would love to see the rumored 70-400mm. but i read the patent, the image height is only 13.Xmm which is less than 14.xmm on aps-c. so may be it's for some kind of 1" or m4/3 system.

When talking about lenses, image height refers to the radius of the image circle, which for Canon APS-C needs to be ~13.5mm.
This could indeed be an interesting lens, but mostly I'd also want something like a 50/1.4. The EF lens with adapter works, but leaves a few things to be desired (mostly size and AF).

ad

 

[AvTvM]

I think that Canon is unhappy with the Ms present userbase. They won't release interesting new cameras or lenses till it's totally and completly gone. ...

Hehe! funny way to look at it. In reality it's the other way round: Canon userbase is unhappy with Canon's mirrorless offering. And refuses in large parts to buy sub-par EOS-M bodies without EVF and without compelling sensor and AF performance.

As far as EF-M lenses go, i would love to buy a highly compact "pancake-ish" portrait lens - something like a EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM for USD/Euro 299 ... optically as good as the 22/2.0.

Macro? Native EF-M lens not urgently needed since EF-S 60 is available, cheap, optically excellent and works well via adapter. Still "compact enough" for typical Macro use cases.

 

[Loswr]

I think that Canon is unhappy with the Ms present userbase. They won't release interesting new cameras or lenses till it's totally and completly gone. ...

Hehe! funny way to look at it. In reality it's the other way round: Canon userbase is unhappy with Canon's mirrorless offering. And refuses in large parts to buy sub-par EOS-M bodies without EVF and without compelling sensor and AF performance.

I think your logic is flawed, maybe because of one too many mirrorslaps to the head. If your reasoning were correct, we'd see sales of those other MILC brands with EVFs and 'compelling sensor and AF performance' driving overall MILC sales up. Instead, while dSLR sales are dropping, MILC sales aren't rising.

 

[AvTvM]

I think that Canon is unhappy with the Ms present userbase. They won't release interesting new cameras or lenses till it's totally and completly gone. ...

Hehe! funny way to look at it. In reality it's the other way round: Canon userbase is unhappy with Canon's mirrorless offering. And refuses in large parts to buy sub-par EOS-M bodies without EVF and without compelling sensor and AF performance.

I think your logic is flawed, maybe because of one too many mirrorslaps to the head. If your reasoning were correct, we'd see sales of those other MILC brands with EVFs and 'compelling sensor and AF performance' driving overall MILC sales up. Instead, while dSLR sales are dropping, MILC sales aren't rising.

You sound like a broken record. Very repetitive. Whenever you run out of real arguments you'll quote some vague sales statistics. So predictable.

But let's look at sales:
1. what is Canon's market share in mirrorslappers? APS-C and FF?
2. What is Canon's market share in the mirrorless market? APS-C? And FF?

Why is that so? Because Canon is "unhappy with their userbase" or because their userbase is unhappy with Canon's half-assed APS-C mirrorless cameras? Or with the total lack of any Canon FF-sensored mirrorless system?

 

[Loswr]

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that R&D resources are finite? Sales statistics are hard numbers that drive business decisions.

Canon has the biggest slice of the larger pie (dSLRs), and a medium-small slice of the much smaller pie (MILCs). Until the sizes of the pies change, continuing to eat the bigger pie is a more effective way to get nutrients. Others may choose to eat the smaller pie, because less of it is being eaten by the bigger eaters. Still others may also focus on growing the apples used to make the pies.

 

[crashpc]

Sales statistics are going down inevitably. But they still dance on the sinking boat, not willing to change anything. I am Canon user, I love their lens range, but I simply won´t buy any other Canon body untill they wake up.

 

[Tinky]

Another way to put Neuros argument (I don't mind putting selective quotes out of context for Neuro, it's kind of his signature..) might be that because sales of DSLRs are down, CSCs are actually performing ahead of the market.

Except in Canons case.

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that anybody anywhere who says anything less than entirely complimentary about Canon will invite a correction from Neuro quoting things like 'science' and 'facts' and his seemingly telepathic hotline to the Canon R&D and marketing teams.

Anyway, hand grenade launched, the weather is good here and it's heading towards dusk, so I think I'll go and get some fresh air just now.

x

 

[Loswr]

Why is it so hard for people to grasp that anybody anywhere who says anything less than entirely complimentary about Canon will invite a correction from Neuro

You just need to read more. Being critical of Canon is fine – they've screwed the pooch on several occasions. I do tend to correct statements that are factually wrong, arguments based on logical fallacies, ignorance of business acumen, unwarranted assumptions that one's own viewpoint represents that of the majority...and occasionally, punctuation.

 

[Tinky]

It's the unwarranted assumptions bit that has me spluttering out my cocoa here. If only I had the time and a fine (or maybe not so fine) toothed comb...

It's an opinion forum. There is an element of the clue in the title. 'Rumor'. Speculation. It's not the spirit of absolutes. Nobody (perhaps yourself excluded) claims to have all the answers. It's good to talk. Mostly.

 

[Loswr]

...unwarranted assumptions that one's own viewpoint represents that of the majority...

It's the unwarranted assumptions bit that has me spluttering out my cocoa here.

I see – so, when people who want more low ISO DR make statements such as, "Unless Canon delivers more low ISO DR, photographers will switch to better systems and Canon is doomed," those statements are...what? Fact? Logical conclusions based on available data?

 

[Tinky]

Your unwarranted assumptions generally.

It's an opinion forum. You are predictably aggressive in making your points.

So do you have a hotline to Canon's head of marketing? Or is it unwarranted assumptions?

 

[archiea]

My interpetation is that Canon dipped into the corporate parts bin (as far as sensors, lens design and menu with the M1 and now the powershot body with the M3) and created the albatross that is the EOs-M platform. The AF and speed suffer because its a component that is derived from the SECONDARY focusing system of their rebel and EOS dlsrs. Meanwhile other cmaera makers, especially the micro 4/nerds, created their system from the ground up. Its like Tesla building a sport car from the ground up while Lincoln puts one of the luxury sedans on a diet and calls it sports car. (in fact thats what my 2004 ford thunderbird is)..

Its common for large manufactuers to do this since they have alot of assets they can leverage vs a frisky start up or platform reboot.

That being said, the japanese love their M3's, and so do I. Theres ALOT of choices in cameras out there and its easy to pin point how any of them SUCK. Whats harder is taking any of those capable system and making great photos from them!!

I for one am happy with the EOS-M3, minus a few menu quibbles that could be fixed with firmware. When I need speed, I grab the DSLR. But I luv that canon tooks some bits, shrunk them and alloed me to hook my flashes to them.. Woudl I love a FF mirrorless from canon, sure! In the meantime I use the M3 as a really poor man's Leica!

 

[Loswr]

My interpetation is that Canon dipped into the corporate parts bin

I think it is also them dipping a toe into the water. Whereas other MILC makers have a lineup of cameras, Canon has one. It seems likely they simply think the market isn't ripe for a major investment. I suspect they were quite encouraged that their first foray into the space – the original EOS M – was the #2 MILC body in the largest MILC geographical market.

 

[Tinky]

My interpetation is that Canon dipped into the corporate parts bin

I think it is also them dipping a toe into the water. Whereas other MILC makers have a lineup of cameras, Canon has one. It seems likely they simply think the market isn't ripe for a major investment. I suspect they were quite encouraged that their first foray into the space – the original EOS M – was the #2 MILC body in the largest MILC geographical market.

"I suspect". Unwarranted assumption? and as fallacies go, you ignore the markets in which the camera was heavily discounted and where certain models and lenses were not marketed.

Not saying you are wrong, I respect your right to an opinion... sorry, unwarranted assumption.

 

[Tinky]

My interpetation is that Canon dipped into the corporate parts bin (as far as sensors, lens design and menu with the M1 and now the powershot body with the M3) and created the albatross that is the EOs-M platform. The AF and speed suffer because its a component that is derived from the SECONDARY focusing system of their rebel and EOS dlsrs. Meanwhile other cmaera makers, especially the micro 4/nerds, created their system from the ground up. Its like Tesla building a sport car from the ground up while Lincoln puts one of the luxury sedans on a diet and calls it sports car. (in fact thats what my 2004 ford thunderbird is)..

Its common for large manufactuers to do this since they have alot of assets they can leverage vs a frisky start up or platform reboot.

That being said, the japanese love their M3's, and so do I. Theres ALOT of choices in cameras out there and its easy to pin point how any of them SUCK. Whats harder is taking any of those capable system and making great photos from them!!

I for one am happy with the EOS-M3, minus a few menu quibbles that could be fixed with firmware. When I need speed, I grab the DSLR. But I luv that canon tooks some bits, shrunk them and alloed me to hook my flashes to them.. Woudl I love a FF mirrorless from canon, sure! In the meantime I use the M3 as a really poor man's Leica!

Oh no, a car analogy! lol. My next analogy is going to be in reference to microwave ovens I think.

 

[Loswr]

My interpetation is that Canon dipped into the corporate parts bin

I think it is also them dipping a toe into the water. Whereas other MILC makers have a lineup of cameras, Canon has one. It seems likely they simply think the market isn't ripe for a major investment. I suspect they were quite encouraged that their first foray into the space – the original EOS M – was the #2 MILC body in the largest MILC geographical market.

"I suspect". Unwarranted assumption? and as fallacies go, you ignore the markets in which the camera was heavily discounted and where certain models and lenses were not marketed.

Not saying you are wrong, I respect your right to an opinion... sorry, unwarranted assumption.

Indeed, it was quite unwarranted for me to assume people would be capable of grasping the point of the argument without me spelling out every little detail and then connecting the dots for them. My bad.

The global MILC market is much smaller than the dSLR market. In the analogy, that means Canon knows the water is tepid. Some market signs point to MILCs growing, perhaps becoming dominant at some future time. In the analogy, Canon knows they have to go swimming in that pool. Canon is making a limited investment in the MILC space now, one body series and a handful of dedicated lenses. In the analogy, that's them dipping their toe in the water. They were encouraged because their initial foray into the market was very successful in the largest part of the global MILC market. The are continuing their limited investment, updating their one model and releasing additional lenses slowly and only in significant global market segments. In the analogy, the water isn't warm and inviting, so Canon didn't dive head-first into the deep end of the pool. But they can slowly wade into the shallow end, with confidence they'll swim effectively in the whole pool once the water warms up.

My, that was tedious – like explaining a concept to a 5-year old – but hopefully you understand the point now.

 

[AvTvM]

The global MILC market is much smaller than the dSLR market.

Not "the market" per se. Only the fact that neither Canon nor Nikon offer compelling MILCs.

If Canon and Nikon today both would sell fully competitive
* APS-C MILCs covering the range between USD 499 for the low end [basically EOS M3 cperformace and features] and USD 1499 for direct competitors to Samsung NX-1 / Fuji XT-1 competitors ... plus a suitable range of native lenses [EF-M price/performance is excellent, just a few more needed]
- FF MILC system - fully competitive with Sony A7/II/R lenses more compact than Sony FE-lenses
the same instand the MILC market would be 85% and DSLRs would be relegated to 15%.
As simple as that.

 

[untenchicken]

My interpetation is that Canon dipped into the corporate parts bin

I think it is also them dipping a toe into the water. Whereas other MILC makers have a lineup of cameras, Canon has one. It seems likely they simply think the market isn't ripe for a major investment. I suspect they were quite encouraged that their first foray into the space – the original EOS M – was the #2 MILC body in the largest MILC geographical market.

"I suspect". Unwarranted assumption? and as fallacies go, you ignore the markets in which the camera was heavily discounted and where certain models and lenses were not marketed.

Not saying you are wrong, I respect your right to an opinion... sorry, unwarranted assumption.

Indeed, it was quite unwarranted for me to assume people would be capable of grasping the point of the argument without me spelling out every little detail and then connecting the dots for them. My bad.

The global MILC market is much smaller than the dSLR market. In the analogy, that means Canon knows the water is tepid. Some market signs point to MILCs growing, perhaps becoming dominant at some future time. In the analogy, Canon knows they have to go swimming in that pool. Canon is making a limited investment in the MILC space now, one body series and a handful of dedicated lenses. In the analogy, that's them dipping their toe in the water. They were encouraged because their initial foray into the market was very successful in the largest part of the global MILC market. The are continuing their limited investment, updating their one model and releasing additional lenses slowly and only in significant global market segments. In the analogy, the water isn't warm and inviting, so Canon didn't dive head-first into the deep end of the pool. But they can slowly wade into the shallow end, with confidence they'll swim effectively in the whole pool once the water warms up.

My, that was tedious – like explaining a concept to a 5-year old – but hopefully you understand the point now.

Neuroanatomist, you really think you are so much better than the rest of us, don't you
Thank god your pictures are so brilliant………. :

 

[Loswr]

The global MILC market is much smaller than the dSLR market.

Not "the market" per se. Only the fact that neither Canon nor Nikon offer compelling MILCs.

Per se: through itself without referring to anything else, intrinsically, taken without qualifications.

So, you're saying that the global MILC market, which comprises 23% of the total global ILC market in 2015 YTD according to CIPA, is not 'much smaller than the dSLR market'?? Clearly, you have lost touch with reality.

The P&S market is in a rapid decline, yet the value of P&S shipments for 2015 YTD is still 2.8x greater than MILC shipments, and the value of dSLR shipments is 1.4x that of P&S.

If you'd like to speculate on what might happen if this or that other thing happens, it's best to first obtain at least a basic grasp of the relevant facts.

 

[Loswr]

Neuroanatomist, you really think you are so much better than the rest of us, don't you
Thank god your pictures are so brilliant………. :

Thanks for sharing your opinion. Too bad the Belgian chocolate business isn't working out so well in Japan (although I'm partial to Swiss chocolate, personally). At least you can buy Canon's full MILC lineup, if that's any consolation.