Canon has discontinued the Canon EOS M6 Mark II

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,301
1,003
Davidson, NC
I was seriously considering buying into the "M" system; as a travel rig. . . but while one or two *lenses* were interesting; most were F6.3-F7.1 crud. I was seeing a few bodies released each year. . .but nothing worthwhile in terms of lenses. This shied me away from the entire product line. I now use a G5x-II for travel. Or an iPhone. Works well enough.
The G5X II as a travel camera has the advantage of an f/1.8-2.8 lens. I find myself in dark, cramped spaces, such as chapels in Italy. So when I need the speed the most, I am shooting at the wide end where the lens is fastest. On bigger cameras out in daylight, I'm shooting about f/8 anyway, so f/7.1 is not crud. But with the small lens and sensor, diffraction becomes an issue very early. Auto exposure chooses wide apertures and low ISOs. I don't know how or when the built-in ND filter kicks in. Maybe that is just for video. So I agree with your travel camera choice. I don't seem on trips ever to regret the 120mm equivalent telephoto limitation. But with cramped interiors and spacious scenic vistas, I could use something wider than the 24mm equivalent. So I resort to taking shots to be stitched once I get home.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,248
6,781
But with cramped interiors and spacious scenic vistas, I could use something wider than the 24mm equivalent.
For urban travel, I would not want to be limited to 24mm on the wide end. Many times, even the wide end of the M11-22 is too narrow:
8DDCD312-490D-4FA1-8781-EA5EA2CC5A5F.jpeg

That was an overnight trip where I took just the M kit. On longer trips, I generally have a FF camera and the 11-24/4L, which is useful outdoors and in:
9AC255D7-E2C3-41A1-930E-032F820854AF.jpeg
2BA0D6A3-79C2-4AC8-A74B-883377359B37.jpeg
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users

Bob Howland

EOS RP
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2012
784
442

OneSnark

Canon Fanboy
Aug 20, 2019
62
36
I use a G7X for travel. The M system has been a big disappointment.

I upgraded a G7x-II to the G5x-II. Although the G5x is less "pocketable"; the EVF is handy and I find the autofocus better. Very nice results.

The G5X II as a travel camera has the advantage of an f/1.8-2.8 lens. I find myself in dark, cramped spaces, such as chapels in Italy. So when I need the speed the most, I am shooting at the wide end where the lens is fastest. On bigger cameras out in daylight, I'm shooting about f/8 anyway, so f/7.1 is not crud. But with the small lens and sensor, diffraction becomes an issue very early. Auto exposure chooses wide apertures and low ISOs. I don't know how or when the built-in ND filter kicks in. Maybe that is just for video. So I agree with your travel camera choice. I don't seem on trips ever to regret the 120mm equivalent telephoto limitation. But with cramped interiors and spacious scenic vistas, I could use something wider than the 24mm equivalent. So I resort to taking shots to be stitched once I get home.


THIS.

Yeah, I like the fast lens. . . . but I am not a fan of the distortion at the wide end. Which is why I wished that the "M" line had a *high quality* F4 zoom alternative. (wasn't being greedy by asking for F2.8 or F2 zooms). For "out in daylight, I'm shooting F8". I hear you on that - - but honestly the P&S (or even a phone) does fine under those conditions. It's for the dark churches that you want the larger sensor (APS-C or FF) and fast glass.

And let's be clear: I *might* have been sold if a F6.3 lens had great image quality; low distortion and good resolution curves. However, the slow M kit lenses did not fit that description. So - - - pass.

Side note: I heard about the good rep for the few M primes. That's all well and good (and I was tempted); but *for a travel rig*; one gotta have zooms (after all. . the intent is to NOT have a big bag of lenses with you . . . .)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

hachu21

EOS 90D
Feb 11, 2014
140
61
France
Yeah, I like the fast lens. . . . but I am not a fan of the distortion at the wide end. Which is why I wished that the "M" line had a *high quality* F4 zoom alternative. (wasn't being greedy by asking for F2.8 or F2 zooms). For "out in daylight, I'm shooting F8". I hear you on that - - but honestly the P&S (or even a phone) does fine under those conditions. It's for the dark churches that you want the larger sensor (APS-C or FF) and fast glass.

And let's be clear: I *might* have been sold if a F6.3 lens had great image quality; low distortion and good resolution curves. However, the slow M kit lenses did not fit that description. So - - - pass.

Side note: I heard about the good rep for the few M primes. That's all well and good (and I was tempted); but *for a travel rig*; one gotta have zooms (after all. . the intent is to NOT have a big bag of lenses with you . . . .)
The 11-22mm f/4-5.6 is one of the M line strengh. To my knowledge, there is no alternative in any brand with such size/price/quality ratio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

Bob Howland

EOS RP
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2012
784
442
I upgraded a G7x-II to the G5x-II. Although the G5x is less "pocketable"; the EVF is handy and I find the autofocus better. Very nice results.
I looked at the G5X but bought the G7x because of pocketability
Side note: I heard about the good rep for the few M primes. That's all well and good (and I was tempted); but *for a travel rig*; one gotta have zooms (after all. . the intent is to NOT have a big bag of lenses with you . . . .)
I have two Sigma primes (16 & 30), the Canon 22 f/2 and the 18-150 but found myself always taking the G7X or a DSLR and L lens. The M5 turned out to be a rather poor substitute in both directions.
 

hachu21

EOS 90D
Feb 11, 2014
140
61
France
The G5X II as a travel camera has the advantage of an f/1.8-2.8 lens. I find myself in dark, cramped spaces, such as chapels in Italy. So when I need the speed the most, I am shooting at the wide end where the lens is fastest. On bigger cameras out in daylight, I'm shooting about f/8 anyway, so f/7.1 is not crud. But with the small lens and sensor, diffraction becomes an issue very early. Auto exposure chooses wide apertures and low ISOs. I don't know how or when the built-in ND filter kicks in. Maybe that is just for video. So I agree with your travel camera choice. I don't seem on trips ever to regret the 120mm equivalent telephoto limitation. But with cramped interiors and spacious scenic vistas, I could use something wider than the 24mm equivalent. So I resort to taking shots to be stitched once I get home.
For low light shots, don't forget that f/1.8-2.8 on 1" sensor is equivalent to f/3.0-4.7 on an Canon APSC sensor. Still brighter but not far off the 15-45 f/3.5-6.3 kit lens. With the added possibility of brighter primes.
But I also get the convenience of a all-in-one package.
 

hachu21

EOS 90D
Feb 11, 2014
140
61
France
I looked at the G5X but bought the G7x because of pocketability

I have two Sigma primes (16 & 30), the Canon 22 f/2 and the 18-150 but found myself always taking the G7X or a DSLR and L lens. The M5 turned out to be a rather poor substitute in both directions.
Interesting viewpoint. best portability OR best quality. Makes sense.
I've always looked for versatility for my tools (mountain bike, skis, clothes, caméras...) So for me the M is the affordable-yet-delivering jack of all trades. When you want only one system, the M has a hard-to-beat value for money. Especially the few lenses.

Maybe, that's why it will be chopped-off. Camera manufacturers are ALL pushing toward higher margin portfolios after all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,248
6,781
Were any of those taken using a tripod?
The WWII memorial in DC was on a tripod (30 s exposure and cropped to pano view, not stitched), the interior of the Saint-Gatien Cathedral in Tours, France was handheld (1/40 s exposure).

The London Eye was on a GorillaPod SLR Zoom on the ground (3.2 s exposure). The GorillaPod is a great companion to an M body, it’s small and light but very useful and versatile…just like the M series. Here’s another shot of the Eye with the M11-22 (2.5 s), taken from one of the Golden Jubilee Bridges over the Thames with the GorillaPod wrapped around a railing:
CEBD0D2C-3624-4C45-B01A-4B13921A7F0F.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

hachu21

EOS 90D
Feb 11, 2014
140
61
France
So which countries has the Canon EOS M6 Mark II is being discontinued in? Searching though Canon US, CAN, UK, AU, and their retailers we find:
US - available
CAN - available
UK - available
AU - discontinued

It looks like Canon Australia has definitely discontinued the M6 Mark II. If anyone can find the second country, that would be great! :)
Canon France : available
Canon Germany : available
Canon Italy : available
Canon Spain : available
Canon Swiss : available
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,248
6,781
The 11-22mm f/4-5.6 is one of the M line strengh. To my knowledge, there is no alternative in any brand with such size/price/quality ratio.
Agreed. For me, no travel solution would work without something wider than 24mm (FF equivalent framing). I have used the PowerShot S95/S100 as walkaround pocket cameras for casual family outings, but the iPhone camera is now good enough to server that purpose.

In fact, if I really want to travel light on a trip I take just the M6, M11-22 and the GorillaPod. The camera+lens fits in the little LowePro DashPoint 30, and the kit is quite small (pictured on an 8.5x11” piece of paper):
F48B80FA-F274-4BB5-97F6-4862BBE04C52.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
2,108
2,135
Agreed. For me, no travel solution would work without something wider than 24mm (FF equivalent framing). I have used the PowerShot S95/S100 as walkaround pocket cameras for casual family outings, but the iPhone camera is now good enough to server that purpose.

In fact, if I really want to travel light on a trip I take just the M6, M11-22 and the GorillaPod. The camera+lens fits in the little LowePro DashPoint 30, and the kit is quite small (pictured on an 8.5x11” piece of paper):
View attachment 203435
For years I travelled with the M1+22mm in a dashpoint20, such a small package!
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,248
6,781
For years I travelled with the M1+22mm in a dashpoint20, such a small package!
I’ve done that, too, although the M6 is very slightly too large. The DashPoint 20 is a perfect fit for an M18-150 or M55-200.
 

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
1,331
1,056
I would like to see (buy) replacement for 22mm f/2 - say 1.4 with excelent resolution and image quality like the 32mm f/1.4, something like 10-25mm f/4 to replace 11-22mm, and a nice standard zoom 16-50mm f/2.8.
Those seem like larger lenses.
Canon never intended the M system like that
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,301
1,003
Davidson, NC
For low light shots, don't forget that f/1.8-2.8 on 1" sensor is equivalent to f/3.0-4.7 on an Canon APSC sensor. Still brighter but not far off the 15-45 f/3.5-6.3 kit lens. With the added possibility of brighter primes.
But I also get the convenience of a all-in-one package.
Not that whole equivalence argument again. I refuse to play this time, other than to say that it is and it isn’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

adrian_bacon

EOS 90D
Aug 12, 2020
150
156
I mean... you were wrong. That's about the most begrudging way to admit it, but at least you did. No need to lash out. Being factually incorrect isn't "disagreeing". Neuro can be strident and brusque but he's tirelessly countered nonsense* on this site longer than I've been here.

*not calling your statements nonsense, I haven't paid close enough attention to what you've been saying tbh
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not always right, and I don't have any issue with being pointed to correct information, and would have been totally happy with continuing a discussion about the differences that were pointed out, however, calling someone else an idiot? What really is the purpose of that? It's not to further the discussion, and since it went there, it was clear that there was no more discussion to be had.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,301
1,003
Davidson, NC
I upgraded a G7x-II to the G5x-II. Although the G5x is less "pocketable"; the EVF is handy and I find the autofocus better. Very nice results.

Yeah, I like the fast lens. . . . but I am not a fan of the distortion at the wide end.
The 7 would fit in my shirt pocket if nothing else was in there. (Usually I carry my phone and some reading glasses there.) The 5 does fine for me in a jacket or pants pocket.

The lens correction in Adobe Camera Raw pretty well takes care of the distortion for me. In rare instances I will tweak the correction a bit.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,301
1,003
Davidson, NC
Agreed. For me, no travel solution would work without something wider than 24mm (FF equivalent framing). I have used the PowerShot S95/S100 as walkaround pocket cameras for casual family outings, but the iPhone camera is now good enough to server that purpose.
I used the S90 and then the S120 before I got the G cameras. Years ago I was quite serious about photography, and found that when I traveled, taking pictures got in the way of my seeing and doing the things that I traveled there for. So I went for some years taking no camera along at all. That was before I had a cell phone. Then I got a rather basic film camera for trips and found that I could trust myself not to let it get in the way of things. So for me, leaving my best gear at home is a feature. Even so, when I got the G5X II, I soon went to Italy for a little over two weeks and from there then took a 14-night cruise to western Mediterranean ports, including more towns in Italy, and I took over 3,000 pictures. That’s less than 100 pictures a day, and so didn’t really interfere with my sightseeing.

My friend who traveled with me on that trip left his good Nikon gear at home and just used his iPhone. Some of his panoramas with the phone on that trip and previous ones with his son were so good that he had me print a few up on 13” wide roll paper and had them framed. I still prefer to have the flexibility of a dedicated camera and the options offered in ACR. He has a more upscale iPhone than mine. I prefer to put the money into a camera rather than getting a top iPhone (much bigger than I want to carry) to upgrade the camera. As the ship left Venice at dark I took pictures from our balcony that I doubt would have fared as well with a phone camera.

But from your comments, I think were I to carry my DSLR and a host of lenses, I might want to get the 17mm TS-E. The shift makes for more stitchable shots than just rotating the camera. Obviously the tilt would be nice for shooting buildings, too.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,248
6,781
But from your comments, I think were I to carry my DSLR and a host of lenses, I might want to get the 17mm TS-E. The shift makes for more stitchable shots than just rotating the camera. Obviously the tilt would be nice for shooting buildings, too.
TS-E lenses are great for architecture, although mostly that's shift. If you're close to a tall building, pointing a regular lens up causes keystoning (the building looks trapezoidal), but keeping the camera level and using shift keeps the vertical lines vertical. Here's an example of the exterior of the Cathédrale Saint-Gatien de Tours, the image on the left is not mine but was clearly taken with a standard lens pointed up, the one on the right is mine with the TS-E 17 and shift. Software correction for keystoning has gotten pretty good, but since I have TS-E lenses I'll stick with the optical correction.

Screen Shot 2022-05-07 at 10.09.07 PM.png Screen Shot 2022-05-07 at 10.09.28 PM.png

You can use shift for stitching as well, getting two shots that are perfectly aligned out of the camera is nice. Stitching with the TS-E 17 gives you an 11mm FoV. However, be aware that if you need the shift to correct the verticals, you can't also use shift for stitching since the shot shifted the other way will make the verticals even worse for that part of the image.

I rarely find tilt useful for architecture, mainly since building facades are flat. Tilt allows you to change the angle of the focal plane so a flat surface that is not parallel to the sensor can be all in focus. Classic use is for landscapes where with tilt you can get the foreground and distant areas in focus without stopping down too much.

I do have one example of a facade where I used shift and tilt – shift to effectively move the camera away from the building (I was on the sidewalk right in front) and tilt so everything from the top of the gate to the tower above was in focus. This is the Basel Rathaus, city hall in Basel, Switzerland:
16710119521_39fc27b820_c.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 4 users

yungfat

EOS 90D
Feb 16, 2013
135
54
I have both the M5 and an RP. Sitting them side by side, the m5 is actually taller than the RP. The RP is a little wider, and deeper, but not by much, and even more interestingly, the RP with the RF 50 STM lens weighs a whopping 5 ounces more than the M5 with the 21 STM lens. The RP is already very close to flagship M size and could pretty easily get a slight shave here and there to get it even more svelte.
View attachment 203409
View attachment 203410
View attachment 203411
Thanks for showing the actual comparison.
I can only tell based on what I can remember.
So the Rp is the answer for M5ii.
If Canon rollout a series of pancake lenses would be awesome!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user