Canon EOS M2 Not Coming to North America

[tomsop]

I have the eos-m and I did not realize when I got it that it would overwhelm my older computer and that I would miss the EVF of my canon rebel.

The videos you shoot are almost worthless because they do not play back without serious stutter on my 2007 iMac and they take forever to upload to youtube. Never understood how I was supposed to process the videos so I could watch them. Even with the updated AF fix the AF is still really slow.

As a camera designed to get us to reach for the camera instead of the iPhone, the product is doomed because it does not provide enough support or instructions on what to do with the video and I need too see more native lenses before I would consider upgrading to another dos-m. I will save my money and buy a real camera with a real viewfinder.

 

[Hillsilly]

It also seems that some have assumed that every new camera model released must be of significant advancement so as to justify everyone upgrading from the previous model, and that if it doesn't meet this requirement, the company must be asleep at the wheel or on the verge of collapse....

People just get upset at missed opportunities. It has already been mentioned above that about 1/10th of serious camera buyers are into mirrorless cameras. It has also been mentioned that mirrorless buyers are happy to spend more on a mirrorless camera than would seem rational. You could then assume that an identifiable/sizeable portion of Canon camera buyers want a well built, feature packed mirrorless camera and are willing to pay for it. And given that Canon has developed a lot of the tech to make a great mirrorless camera, I can sympathise with those who think the M2 is a let down. Canon can do so much better.

This M2 announcement causes another problem for Canon. It sends a clear message to many that Canon isn't serious about mirrorless and won't be for some time (if ever). (Of course the M1 also sent that message loud and clear - are there still only 2 lenses for it, one of which you can't even buy in half of the world?) Therefore, all of those who are mirrorless curious are just going to pick up a Fuji, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica etc. If they invest into those systems and like it (as I did with Fuji), they're not going to quickly switch back. All of sudden, Canon has lost a large swathe of early adopters who would otherwise be proudly espousing the benefits of Canon mirrorless cameras to their non-Canon friends. By the way, have I mentioned how awesome the Fuji 14mm is? And have you checked out the flash synch times on the X-100S - what kind of creative opportunities would that provide you? (Anyway, you get the idea - deep down, I'm still a Canon fanboi.)

 

[BozillaNZ]

It also seems that some have assumed that every new camera model released must be of significant advancement so as to justify everyone upgrading from the previous model, and that if it doesn't meet this requirement, the company must be asleep at the wheel or on the verge of collapse....

People just get upset at missed opportunities. It has already been mentioned above that about 1/10th of serious camera buyers are into mirrorless cameras. It has also been mentioned that mirrorless buyers are happy to spend more on a mirrorless camera than would seem rational. You could then assume that an identifiable/sizeable portion of Canon camera buyers want a well built, feature packed mirrorless camera and are willing to pay for it. And given that Canon has developed a lot of the tech to make a great mirrorless camera, I can sympathise with those who think the M2 is a let down. Canon can do so much better.

This M2 announcement causes another problem for Canon. It sends a clear message to many that Canon isn't serious about mirrorless and won't be for some time (if ever). (Of course the M1 also sent that message loud and clear - are there still only 2 lenses for it, one of which you can't even buy in half of the world?) Therefore, all of those who are mirrorless curious are just going to pick up a Fuji, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica etc. If they invest into those systems and like it (as I did with Fuji), they're not going to quickly switch back. All of sudden, Canon has lost a large swathe of early adopters who would otherwise be proudly espousing the benefits of Canon mirrorless cameras to their non-Canon friends. By the way, have I mentioned how awesome the Fuji 14mm is? And have you checked out the flash synch times on the X-100S - what kind of creative opportunities would that provide you? (Anyway, you get the idea - deep down, I'm still a Canon fanboi.)

Yes, I found the fact that people come up with all kinds of excuses to justify that what Canon have done is good, which is strange! What aspect of M2 is done good compared to the M1? The fact that it is (ever so slightly) smaller? And comes with WiFi? To me that is not good enough!

The reason that I'm bashing it is because I think it could have done so much better, given what it already has in it's sleeve now.

 

[eml58]

Thanks for the input regarding the Sony...I cannot buy one...but I am eagerly watching the development of all-things mirrorless.

Me too, I think Sony are on the right track with the a7/a7r, they've let themselves down with a mediocre approach to the Marketing side, basically you can choose from a Sony zoom, or the Zeiss 35 at launch, the Zeiss is excellent though.

I went to process some RAW files from the a7r today and was left a little Gob Smacked that not even Sony (as far as I could find out) have a full on software set to process files from the a7r, all I could find was some hopeless system called "PlayMemoriesHome", which allows you to view and do some minor cropping but no conversion from the RAW format, hopeless. Fortunately I found Adobe has a release 5.3 that does allow the files to be worked in PS/LR5.

I really do hope Canon at some point decide to get serious re mirror less, but I can't see any real signs at present, in the meantime I'll play with the a7r for a while and see what the possibilities are, and pick up the 1Dx or the 5DMK III when i need to get serious.

 

[zlatko]

It also seems that some have assumed that every new camera model released must be of significant advancement so as to justify everyone upgrading from the previous model, and that if it doesn't meet this requirement, the company must be asleep at the wheel or on the verge of collapse....

People just get upset at missed opportunities. It has already been mentioned above that about 1/10th of serious camera buyers are into mirrorless cameras. It has also been mentioned that mirrorless buyers are happy to spend more on a mirrorless camera than would seem rational. You could then assume that an identifiable/sizeable portion of Canon camera buyers want a well built, feature packed mirrorless camera and are willing to pay for it. And given that Canon has developed a lot of the tech to make a great mirrorless camera, I can sympathise with those who think the M2 is a let down. Canon can do so much better.

This M2 announcement causes another problem for Canon. It sends a clear message to many that Canon isn't serious about mirrorless and won't be for some time (if ever). (Of course the M1 also sent that message loud and clear - are there still only 2 lenses for it, one of which you can't even buy in half of the world?) Therefore, all of those who are mirrorless curious are just going to pick up a Fuji, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica etc. If they invest into those systems and like it (as I did with Fuji), they're not going to quickly switch back. All of sudden, Canon has lost a large swathe of early adopters who would otherwise be proudly espousing the benefits of Canon mirrorless cameras to their non-Canon friends. By the way, have I mentioned how awesome the Fuji 14mm is? And have you checked out the flash synch times on the X-100S - what kind of creative opportunities would that provide you? (Anyway, you get the idea - deep down, I'm still a Canon fanboi.)

Yes, I found the fact that people come up with all kinds of excuses to justify that what Canon have done is good, which is strange! What aspect of M2 is done good compared to the M1? The fact that it is (ever so slightly) smaller? And comes with WiFi? To me that is not good enough!

The reason that I'm bashing it is because I think it could have done so much better, given what it already has in it's sleeve now.

It could have been so much better for you. You wanted it to have an EVF, tilt-screen, built-in flash, added controls, new sensor, etc. And then of course it would be a very different camera, with a different size & shape and a different price point. It would have been better for you, but it would have been worse for others. Indeed, add all of those features and some likely buyers will instantly lose interest — because they don't want any of them. Some people will like the M2 just the way it is, especially with the improved AF, as appears in this video - http://cweb.canon.jp/newsrelease/2013-12/pr-eos-m2.html

Who knows, something like your version of the M2 might be on Canon's calendar. But even a company as large as Canon can't and won't try to fill every market niche. If M43 already offers the camera you want, why blame Canon for not building the camera that someone else already builds? We don't blame Fuji for not offering anything like the 1DX or 5D3, or like some of Canon's fantastic lenses.

We can all bash a camera for not being built to our personal specifications, and miss the point that it meets other people's needs very well. I could bash the 5D3 for not being lighter & smaller, but then it would have to be a different camera, and such a camera might be worse for people who like it just the way it is. I could bash the SL1 for not having a big 2,000 shot battery, but then it would have to be a different camera, and worse for some people who like it small the way it is.

 

[spinworkxroy]

People no longer buy gear that just does enough..
We buy new cameras and of course expect to have new tech inside, regardless if we need it or not or if the old tech works as well..that's no longer the point.
It's all about innovation and keeping up with the times. when another company releases something new, it will most definitely be something "new" worth upgrading to. Canon seems to be the only one releasing new models using old tech and not changing much else.
We just feel short changed that's all..it's not because we need the new tech..it's because we're paying for something new, we'd want something new.

 

[Hillsilly]

....We can all bash a camera for not being built to our personal specifications, and miss the point that it meets other people's needs very well.

Sadly, I'll never know if it meets my needs. Living outside of Japan, I will never see one.

 

[Woody]

We just feel short changed that's all..it's not because we need the new tech..it's because we're paying for something new, we'd want something new.

Well said.

That was certainly my thoughts when I got myself an OMD EM5 a year ago. It was one of the most celebrated cameras on the planet at that time, having won the DPReview Camera of the Year award over its closest competitor, the Nikon D800.

Well, one year later, I dumped the EM5 together with a whole bunch of accessories and lenses. It's not for me. Yes, it's got some nifty new technology, but the old and reliable DSLRs serve my needs better. 8)

My point is that the latest and best technology need not necessarily be what we really need.

 

[spinworkxroy]

Well said.

That was certainly my thoughts when I got myself an OMD EM5 a year ago. It was one of the most celebrated cameras on the planet at that time, having won the DPReview Camera of the Year award over its closest competitor, the Nikon D800.

Well, one year later, I dumped the EM5 together with a whole bunch of accessories and lenses. It's not for me. Yes, it's got some nifty new technology, but the old and reliable DSLRs serve my needs better. 8)

My point is that the latest and best technology need not necessarily be what we really need.

Exactly, we never need the latest iphones or Samsung smartphones but every since year they release a new model, i will buy the latest model and do exactly the same thing on it as i did with the previous model....surf internet and make calls...hecl i think a phone 3 years ago did the same thing for me as well! We always want the latest and if we're paying for the latest, there had better be new tech inside We're all gear lusting hehe..we need help.

 

[BozillaNZ]

Exactly, we never need the latest iphones or Samsung smartphones but every since year they release a new model, i will buy the latest model and do exactly the same thing on it as i did with the previous model....surf internet and make calls...hecl i think a phone 3 years ago did the same thing for me as well! We always want the latest and if we're paying for the latest, there had better be new tech inside We're all gear lusting hehe..we need help.

But when some company brings the same old sh!t and call it brand new and asks for a premium, we have a problem. However apparently some people are perfectly happy about that too...

 

[BozillaNZ]

It could have been so much better for you. You wanted it to have an EVF, tilt-screen, built-in flash, added controls, new sensor, etc. And then of course it would be a very different camera, with a different size & shape and a different price point.

I wanted ONE of the features that I listed to barely justify it being a new model, but apparently Canon delivered NONE. I see no purpose of this release at all.

Now you tell me, what's the difference between M1 and M2 again?

 

[lw]

What Canon actually said was "At this time we have no plans to announce in the U.S."

And what Canon UK said was "Currently, it is not planned to range the EOS M2 in Europe. Distribution and demand will be constantly reviewed and the situation may change in the future.'

My take is that Canon US were planning on launching the M2 at CES in January - that would be inline with the same US-based rumour sites saying "no new cameras this year". Canon Asia has simply 'jumped the gun'

In the meantime the US and EU have inventories of Ms to shift, and didn't want the M2 to stop that. The UK has a Christmas cashback promotion on the M for example, and clearly would want that to finish and help them clear any remaining inventories before launching a new camera in the new year.

Even if the US and EU see the M2 as a minor upgrade (I don't myself), they still need the M2 in order to be more competitive in the CSC market - why try and compete with a poorer camera when a better version is readily available?

Why would Canon US and EU continue to promote and laud the features of the M as their (only) CSC camera, when everybody and their dog will know full well there is a much better model available that addresses the known weaknesses of the current M?

At some point the inventory of current M cameras is going to dry up. Canon are not going to make both the M and M2. The inventory may have already started to dry up in Asia forcing them to launch the M2 now.

So what happens then? The US and EU just keep selling EF-M lenses, but no camera? Pull out of the CSC market entirely, or put it on hold and try and re-enter at a later date, when potential customers have already gone elsewhere?

And if the US and EU are waiting for a M Pro model to be even more competitive on features they believe are required, they would still need a entry level M2 to complement it and suck new users in - one camera a system does not make.

And how long is it before the M Pro appears? Weeks, months? What do the US and EU sell in the meantime? Nothing? And just send any CSC purchasers into the willing arms of their competitors?

The rumours always were for two new M cameras.

I think we will still see both the M2 and possibly the M Pro launched at CES or early in the new year.

 

[dufflover]

But when some company brings the same old sh!t and call it brand new and asks for a premium, we have a problem. However apparently some people are perfectly happy about that too...

Well said!
Or worse they trot out the usual "you don't need this or that" to take good photos. Never the disputed point to begin with. I just want my hard earned (which us enthusiasts spend a lot of on photography) to get good value.

It'd be like Apple still charging $700 for same iPhone year after year calling it brand new in only one rehashed way. oh wait they already do that don't they

lol j/k

 

[RobertP]

Their may be 1 more generation left in DSLRs but with EVFs offering features that OVFs can't the mirror's days are looking numbered.

I think there are still a lot of features of OVF that EVF can't match which are particularly useful to most photographers. OVF is still better in low light and has infinitely faster refresh. Yes, I think EVF is more helpful when it comes to finding the correct exposure but you can't say that you can't trust your camera's own metering especially if you know how to effectively use spot metering.

I'm not sure where the disagreement is here. I'm not suggesting that everybody should go mirrorless tomorrow. The 5D Mark IV will have a mirror. Mirrorless cameras are lighter than SLRs and there are no back focusing issues to worry about. PDAF on a sensor is here. Its only a matter of time before it reaches 1DX speeds. EVFs are improving and our eyes don't have infinite refresh. When I said that the mirror's days were numbered I meant years not days.

The only reason I'd take a Canon 6D over a Sony A7 is the lack of lenses for the A7. There isn't a lens out there for the A7 that I want. I'd rather have an M2 with a pancake lens than the 6D or A7. If I have to compromise then I'll take portability over low light performance and dynamic range.

 

[Woody]

But when some company brings the same old sh!t and call it brand new and asks for a premium, we have a problem. However apparently some people are perfectly happy about that too...

Most folks got their Math wrong. One cannot directly convert the Japanese Yen prices to USD/Euro. Rather, price of EOS-M2 18-55 STM kit vs that of EOS-M kit is about 35% higher. So, if one is paying US$300 for the original EOS-M 18-55 kit, the updated version will cost about US$400 (if it's ever made available in USA), not US$800 that most people expect. So, slightly more expensive than what one expects, but still cheap compared to the competition.

 

[scyrene]

How can people feel short changed by something they haven't bought? I completely understand the desire for better products (although how some people define 'better' seem rather short-sighted), but if something is released that isn't for you, you don't have to buy it. The money we've spent on cameras and lenses in the past was for them alone, it doesn't entitle us to anything in future. If a company moves in a direction we don't like, we don't have to go with them, but stamping our feet and threatening a tantrum (which seems the equivalent of proclaiming 'I'm going to sell all my gear and move to another brand') strikes me as rather immature.

The M2 doesn't impact me one way or the other, so why should I care? If I was in the market for this type of camera, I'd look at what's available now and choose one (and I would advise others to do the same), not wait around for possible future products.

Incidentally, it's not true that only Canon releases new gear that is similar to old lines. It's bewildering how many compact cameras and superzooms come out every few months, whose specifications seem hardly different from the existing ones. And wasn't the D610 essentially identical to the D600, to pick a single example?

 

[BJDrew]

Like the Camera so far, has a load of the things I had hoped Canon might put into V2 of the M.

Image was shot with the M.

Funny, I jumped ship from Canon but kept the M to take pictures of my Sony stuff as well. It is worthless on the used market so makes a nice tool for making quick videos.

After seeing the very first files, I was like "What was I doing all this time?!?"

 

[Marsu42]

Why would Canon US and EU continue to promote and laud the features of the M as their (only) CSC camera, when everybody and their dog will know full well there is a much better model available that addresses the known weaknesses of the current M?

Because everybody and their guinea pigs know that "addressing" the known weaknesses doesn't mean *solving* them, so you might as well buy a cheap M1 rather than a half-baked M2.

Canon's one tech advantage is the dual pixel af... meaning the M2 will have a very short life and the only reason the M3 with the 70d's sensor isn't here yet would be that the r&d timeline of the M and EOS weren't in sync so they produce the M2 as an intermediary product. In the computer/phone market this happens all the time, short-lived "soon to be outdated" products are Asia only since the market seems to be faster over there, less shipping and less global ad costs.

It also might indicate that the US have also reached the point of not being a primary market anymore - until now my observation was only the EU didn't get some of the latest phone/computer/... updates but older overstocked versions - the global economy seems to be changing.

 

[jazz55]

How can people feel short changed by something they haven't bought? I completely understand the desire for better products (although how some people define 'better' seem rather short-sighted), but if something is released that isn't for you, you don't have to buy it. The money we've spent on cameras and lenses in the past was for them alone, it doesn't entitle us to anything in future. If a company moves in a direction we don't like, we don't have to go with them, but stamping our feet and threatening a tantrum (which seems the equivalent of proclaiming 'I'm going to sell all my gear and move to another brand') strikes me as rather immature.

The M2 doesn't impact me one way or the other, so why should I care? If I was in the market for this type of camera, I'd look at what's available now and choose one (and I would advise others to do the same), not wait around for possible future products.

Incidentally, it's not true that only Canon releases new gear that is similar to old lines. It's bewildering how many compact cameras and superzooms come out every few months, whose specifications seem hardly different from the existing ones. And wasn't the D610 essentially identical to the D600, to pick a single example?

Thank you for expressing how I feel, but I will also add my two cents' worth. As a current owner of an M, I was planning to buy the new model with a 22mm kit lens since I have the 18-55 and recently bought the 11-22. My friends and I do a lot of hiking. Thus, the small form factor influenced my decision to go with this camera model. I am an amateur so I'm not that invested in cameras. I would like and am willing to spend more on a new model so that I don't have to change lenses on my camera regularly (I am afraid to clean my sensor). Due to the low price of the original M, Canon has me in their fold (Canon Strategy Step 1). In essence, I am the consumer which Canon's marketing may be targeting. Since the M2 is not available in NA, I will wait and while doing so, continue to plan for my next DSLR and lenses, likely a Canon (Canon Strategy Step 2). I realize others may have pressing needs for a more sophisticated model, but it is evident no manufacturer can tailor a model for each individual. That is why there is a Canon (or Nikon, or Sony, etc.) system from which anyone can choose different models. All a manufacturer can do is carry out a market analysis and create models targeting consumers based on such analysis. Whether or not Canon currently has the technology for the features you and I want, no one seems to know. If they don't, then we are free to choose the model with the features we need/want from another manufacturer. Many times I have read that Canon is a very conservative company so perhaps they are waiting to see how Sony, Nikon and others succeed or fail with mirrorless systems before they fully commit. I have many friends (old and young) who take pictures with their cell phones and are happy with their results. They are not even aware of mirrorless cameras. However, they are aware of P&Ss and DSLRs and of all the manufacturers, they are most familiar with Canon and Nikon and to some extent, Sony and Olympus. My guess is that when these friends decide to buy a camera, they will first turn to these familiar brands and with Canon being the most familiar brand at the moment, well, you know...

 

[zlatko]

It could have been so much better for you. You wanted it to have an EVF, tilt-screen, built-in flash, added controls, new sensor, etc. And then of course it would be a very different camera, with a different size & shape and a different price point.

I wanted ONE of the features that I listed to barely justify it being a new model, but apparently Canon delivered NONE. I see no purpose of this release at all.

Now you tell me, what's the difference between M1 and M2 again?

It seems you didn't watch the video I linked to. Clearly the AF is improved and the screen doesn't black out after each exposure, and that is a good thing considering all of the complaints about AF with the first M. Adding one of the features you wanted would have been nice for you, but not for someone else. It seems Canon is not going to build your personal camera, so you can settle for one of the 40 or so cameras that they do build (not counting video cameras), or buy from another brand that maybe builds something closer to your personal camera. If adding just one feature would have met your threshold for having a purpose, then you are just counting features. Some customers will enjoy the small refinements, not wanting a different camera with different features.