I will study the M system. I need a light camera with light lenses for non-professional work. I did not look into them so far as I kept hearing it will be discontinued and is 'ageing'. Since I am not in desperate rush for such a system (iPhone!), I wait for a new crop light camera with lenses to match. There are brilliant options in Fuji and Sony but I would like to stay with Canon.
Exactly what I’ve been saying. That’s why there’s the EOS M, which has been and likely still is the globally best-selling MILC line. Not sure why some people believe Canon will replace the M line with APS-C RF mount cameras, other than those people have the delusion that they represent a large market segment for Canon.
Personally, I have two M bodies and all the EF-M lenses. It’s a great, portable, relatively inexpensive system (especially compared to my FF gear), and delivers very good image quality.
www.the-digital-picture.com
Wow.Personally, I have two M bodies and all the EF-M lenses. It’s a great, portable, relatively inexpensive system (especially compared to my FF gear), and delivers very good image quality.
For the lenses, I wrote most of the TDP reviews.
Canon EF-M Lens Reviews
The-Digital-Picture.com is your source for clear, concise and complete Canon EF-M Lens Reviews
I’m not resistant to it, I just think it’s very unlikely. Canon is a business, they’ll do what makes fiscal sense.
I have an S120 as well, decent but not great. Check out the G series.I explored more. I think a Canon S120 (is that the latest in the series?) may work perfectly for my needs.
I mean the people that want a small and cheap ‘real camera’ are not the same people that want a reach limit busting 7D replacement.I agree with your premise but you can't use the RF800 with the M series. If you mean M series for cheap/small (or M + EF white lenses for reach) OR any of the R bodies + RF800mm then I concur.
Cheap reach is the reason that 7D users will claim with pixel density being the primary one. 7D users will complain that the M6ii/90D with adapted long white lenses is not useful because it doesn't have dual card/weather sealed but it does achieve the required reach parameter.
Using 7Dii + medium whites (70-200/2.8, 300/4, 400/5.6 etc) with TCs gives dual card/AF/fps with pixel density to avoid paying huge sums for big whites.
R5 price is too much for a 7Dii replacement with the 17mp crop being "vastly" insufficient cf 20mp in 7Dii and we can't use TCs with RF70-200mm/2.8 or limited range with RF100-500mm.
They yearn for the 90D/M6ii sensor but in a R mount body at a R6 price (or lower). The unanswerable question is how big is the market for Canon?
I used to have a 7D but I am happy to be corrected by the 7Dii user base for their needs
Of course yes. Let's wait and see. I would suspect there is enough demand.
The Canon M system will never compete for ‘real’ photographers to the Fuji system, it will never get the lens options or investment Fuji have put into the X series. Don’t forget Fuji don’t make ff cameras so 90% of their R&D goes into their crop sensor cameras and lenses.
You are missing the point. Equivalence.but they miss out on 3mp (20mp 7Dii vs 17mp R5 cropped)
I see what you mean. the only downside is the prime 800mm. The EF100-400mm (with or without TCs) seems to be the standard lens used. To get some flexibility with focal length would mean the RF100-500mm which is an entirely different price point. Even adding the RF600 would make it more expensive and heavier in total. I guess a RF600 + 1.4TC is another option but you lose another stop
Or they could get the R6, RF800, RF 1.4x for around $3897 and get 20mp without cropping at 800mm and 1120mm. And they can still throw their EF 100-400 on it for closer stuff.but they miss out on 3mp (20mp 7Dii vs 17mp R5 cropped)
Yep , and I'd just keep using my 7Dii as it would still be vastly superior to a low budget RF full frame especially for bird photography.
