Canon has discontinued the Canon EOS M6 Mark II

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,547
7,322
Oh yeah 54mm instead of 47mm , wow that's 3.5mm bigger radially so the camera will potentially be slightly larger . Oh dear ! :ROFLMAO:
Compare the EF-M 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 STM to the EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 STM. Same top line specs, same number of elements, same weight. The EF-S lens, which needs to accommodate the throat diameter of a FF mount, is a 'slight' 58% larger by volume.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 3 users

LSXPhotog

Automotive, Motorsports, Commerical, & Real Estate
CR Pro
Apr 2, 2015
616
687
www.diossiphotography.com
If they don't follow up with an M7 announcement that'll solidify my decision to change to Fuji. I don't want a bulky FF mount on an APS-C camera.
As someone that made the switch to Fujifilm for travel, I would love to share my experiences with you - if you had any questions. Just get ready for a comically large step backwards in all things autofocus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

tron

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
5,131
1,508
I don't like this news.
Because I cannot imagine if and what consequences this means to the EOS M system.
I am no M owner. But if I was to get one body It would have been the M6 II. Because I like the idea of the optional EVF.

Edit: In Germany almost every shop has it on stock.
Same here! It's nice to have options.
 

takesome1

EOS 5D Mark IV
Aug 23, 2013
1,668
288
101
None your business Alaska
Wow, Canon has discontinued the M6 Mark II. The M line must be on the way out, I read it on the internet.

It possibly would make sense in some way that a APS-C R body will be released and the M canceled.
The Canon line does not have the migration path to upper end bodies with the R system that it had with EF-s to EF line.
The M line answered the call for a mirror-less body to compete when it had none. But that is not a niche for the body anymore.
If the M line does get phased out it will be more about potential profit and sales rather than current sales.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

JustUs7

EOS RP
Feb 5, 2020
285
558
For me personally (while traveling with my family) it's a tough decision finding the right balance between being a good father and a selfish photographing ass.

My kids usually let me know which one I’m being.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Jul 12, 2011
387
37
This is great news for Fuji! Rumors of the M system demise may be premature, but the uncertainty certainly creates an opportunity for Fuji to emphasize a robust APS sensor, a mature and excellent lens line and compact ergonomically excellent body choices. Perhaps even M4/3 may start a re-emergence as an alternative to bulky full frame options.
 

Blue Zurich

The artist formerly known as slclick
Jan 22, 2022
202
321
This is great news for Fuji! Rumors of the M system demise may be premature, but the uncertainty certainly creates an opportunity for Fuji to emphasize a robust APS sensor, a mature and excellent lens line and compact ergonomically excellent body choices. Perhaps even M4/3 may start a re-emergence as an alternative to bulky full frame options.
Until they 'possibly' realize the colors, AF and menus pale in comparison to what they had with Canon. YMMV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
651
671
Wow, Canon has discontinued the M6 Mark II. The M line must be on the way out, I read it on the internet.

It possibly would make sense in some way that a APS-C R body will be released and the M canceled.
The Canon line does not have the migration path to upper end bodies with the R system that it had with EF-s to EF line.
The M line answered the call for a mirror-less body to compete when it had none. But that is not a niche for the body anymore.
If the M line does get phased out it will be more about potential profit and sales rather than current sales.
I think you have that backwards. EF-s lenses don't fit on an EF body, so the only migration path was for an EF-s body owner to buy EF lenses. If he, she, it bought an EF body, his EF-s lenses didn't come along for the ride.
 
Last edited:

adrian_bacon

EOS 90D
Aug 12, 2020
159
166
Correct. But comparing the EF50mm and the EF40mm, the EF40mm is about half the length. My thought is that a RF40mm pancake should be about half the length of the RF50mm. That would be great!
That would be nice, though half the length would make it thinner than the current EF 40. I'd be happy with roughly the same length as the EF 40.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,547
7,322
I think you have that backwards. EF-s lenses don't fit on and EF body, so the only migration path was for an EF-s body owner to buy EF lenses. If he, she, it bought an EF body, his EF-s lenses didn't come along for the ride.
And as I've pointed out several times, Canon had mountains of data from product registrations on who bought what bodies and lenses and when, so they knew quite well how often people followed that migration path when they intentionally chose to design out the ability to mount RF lenses on M bodies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Pierre Lagarde

Canon, Nikon and So on ...
Aug 4, 2020
85
113
France
www.deviantart.com
Oh yeah 54mm instead of 47mm , wow that's 3.5mm bigger radially so the camera will potentially be slightly larger . Oh dear ! :ROFLMAO:
For the vertical size of the camera it's at least 7mm more needed to place the mount, which is not negligible (if you want to play with numbers) and that is not even considering the RF mount is thicker.
Good luck with trying to put safely a RF mount on a M200 or even a bigger M6 Mark II. (see figures)
Whatsoever, Nikon did the move with Z mount. The result is they have very small FF Z6 and Z7 but, to my sense, Z50 and ZFc are already significantly bigger than EOS M50.
The goal of M system is (was ?) to be as small as possible.
Using RF mount would probably dismiss this purpose. Even if it's possible to produce a smaller camera than RP, I mean it couldn't be the same cameras as M6 or M200, whatever is the design. And even with the M50 design, that leaves more room thanks to the addition of the VF, it would probably be quite tricky, I think.
Also, the shapes and sizes of RF-S lenses would have to be different too, of course.
Let's hope Canon can do an equivalent to the EF-M 11-22mm, for instance, which is one of the best wide angle zoom they produced, especially considering the performances/size+price ratio.
But of course, there are also financial motivations, and M system can look less future proof than R in that regard at this right moment.
Capture d’écran 2022-05-06 à 17.14.09.png Capture d’écran 2022-05-06 à 17.13.13.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

adrian_bacon

EOS 90D
Aug 12, 2020
159
166
Your staff is too short. You’re digging in the wrong place.

Why is it that when people don’t understand something, they make up some bullshit to support their incorrect statements, and think people will believe it? It’s puerile, like when your kid tries to convince you they brushed their teeth, but their breath smells like dinner and they didn’t even bother wetting their toothbrush to make the lie plausible.

Did you really just count the 8 pins on the EF lens-facing side of the adapter and the 9 contacts on the EF-M camera-facing side and come to that simplistic and totally incorrect conclusion? ‘Reserved for future use’ is really the best you could come up with? Well, people make themselves look like idiots every day, so you’ve got lots of company.

With a modicum of initiative, you could have at least counted lens contacts. EF-M lenses have 9 to match the 9 mount pins, whereas EF lenses have only 7 contacts for the 8 mount pins. One of the EF lens contacts is double-width and bridges two mount pins together, that’s the analog ground. EF-M uses a single pin for ground, so functionally there are two additional pins in the EF-M mount. The mount adapter wires two of the pins on the EF side to a single contact on the EF-M side.

Of the two new pins in the EF-M mount, one is an electronic replacement for a physical microswitch in the EF mount to confirm full mounting of a lens. The other is used to signal that an EF/EF-S lens is mounted in the adapter when it’s used.

The remaining pins have the same functionality for both mounts, although the order of the pins is different between them. Also, EF-M lenses operate at a lower voltage and higher clock speed than EF lenses. So no, it's not even close to 'literally straight through'.

Details on the EF-M mount shared above are described in its patent:

The right thing for you to do here would be to admit that you were wrong. Go ahead...surprise me.
What a surprise, some guy on the internet has taken to calling others idiots when he doesn't agree with them. Shocker.

If you want to get super technical and start splitting hairs, fine. At that level, I'm wrong, however the fact remains that EF glass mounted on an M body just works and doesn't require (as far as I can tell) an intermediary translator board in the adapter to translate between the two mounts. For me, that's effectively pass-through. Not passthrough would be something like MFT to EF.

It's pretty clear you have an overwhelming desire to be right and come out on top at the expense of disparaging others, and I have other things to do, so I'll step off and let you declare your victory over me. If you're actually like that in real life, I'd spend as little time as possible around you. This could have evolved into a discussion about what the actual differences were, but alas... people...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

lote82

EOS 90D
Jan 4, 2022
172
142
It's pretty clear you have an overwhelming desire to be right and come out on top at the expense of disparaging others, and I have other things to do, so I'll step off and let you declare your victory over me. If you're actually like that in real life, I'd spend as little time as possible around you. This could have evolved into a discussion about what the actual differences were, but alas... people...
Legends say he's not a real person but a ghost of a real Norwegian-Troll roaming through forums and sucking energy from its members... But who knows!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,547
7,322
What a surprise, some guy on the internet has taken to calling others idiots when he doesn't agree with them. Shocker.

If you want to get super technical and start splitting hairs, fine. At that level, I'm wrong, however the fact remains that EF glass mounted on an M body just works and doesn't require (as far as I can tell) an intermediary translator board in the adapter to translate between the two mounts. For me, that's effectively pass-through. Not passthrough would be something like MFT to EF.

It's pretty clear you have an overwhelming desire to be right and come out on top at the expense of disparaging others, and I have other things to do, so I'll step off and let you declare your victory over me. If you're actually like that in real life, I'd spend as little time as possible around you. This could have evolved into a discussion about what the actual differences were, but alas... people...
I don't call people idiots because I disagree with them. I call people idiots when they post incorrect information, then try to back those false statements up with more incorrect information.

I knew that admitting you were wrong was too much to expect. You can just reserve that for future use, like the 9th pin in your EF-M mount. :rolleyes:

Alas, people...
 

takesome1

EOS 5D Mark IV
Aug 23, 2013
1,668
288
101
None your business Alaska
I think you have that backwards. EF-s lenses don't fit on and EF body, so the only migration path was for an EF-s body owner to buy EF lenses. If he, she, it bought an EF body, his EF-s lenses didn't come along for the ride.

The 50D was the bridge camera from crop to full frame. (Canon's marketing at the time). Later the 7D was released with the same idea. You have a path up for IQ.

So you buy a crop body it comes with a kit lens. The EF-s lens doesn't need to leave your kit just because you bought a FF body. It still fits on the crop body it came with. My 5D II and 50D went on many rides together over the course of several years.
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
651
671
The 50D was the bridge camera from crop to full frame. (Canon's marketing at the time). Later the 7D was released with the same idea. You have a path up for IQ.

So you buy a crop body it comes with a kit lens. The EF-s lens doesn't need to leave your kit just because you bought a FF body. It still fits on the crop body it came with. My 5D II and 50D went on many rides together over the course of several years.
And my R5 and my m6 II go on many rides together. I fail to see much difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user