Canon has discontinued the Canon EOS M6 Mark II

[OneSnark]

Happy pills and (more importantly) a full night's sleep has improved my disposition.

I was overly harsh on the EF-S lenses. . . . I have shot a number of the kit EF-S lenses, and the 10-22/EF-S is in my day kit.

My point was I strongly doubt we are going to see a higher-than-kit quality F4 lens in a reduced size RF-S mount; lest it cannibalize the full size RF lens sales.
We are likely to see only standard kit lenses. . .and I suspect. . . . . if one looks at the cost of the EF lenses to the RF equivalents. . .we are going to say a eye-watering price increase (*especially* considering current inflation).

Would an EF-M 24-70/F4 zoom really have been all that big? That's what was missing from that lineup.

And yes. . .I think I am ALSO not in the target market for the EF-M. I probably am in the RF-S target market - - - buy the R7 with RF "L" lenses. BUT I just got priced out (not willing to step up)

 

[stevelee]

3. "3x the ef-s cost" and "without image stabilization" come straight out of your pill spoiled imagination. Didn't you know that IBIS and lens stabilisation can work together?

Of course they can. But the point was cost. They can cut corners by leaving out stabilization in the lens and save money. You have IBIS to take care of you. And IBIS is supposedly more effective with wider lenses anyhow. And you are likely to use wider lenses when you have the crop factor, other than when you are using it for "reach." And in that case with longer lenses you use a tripod or for handheld you supposedly do better with the lens taking care of it than with IBIS alone. But they can make affordable kit lenses without IS.

My EF-S 10–22mm lens doesn't have IS at all, and of course neither do my Rebel bodies. I never missed it. Admittedly I was using a tripod when shooting interiors for a Realtor.

Many years ago an online friend (dating back to Compuserve forums in the '80s) who works in a camera store recommended that when I went to DSLRs that I get a Sony body. I would save bundles of money by not having IS in the lenses. Back then he did have a point I thought, but I didn't take his advice.

 

[grantmasterflash]

The one thing that the M-naysayers don't understand. We EOS-M owners don't care about EF-M, we care about size. IF Canon can make an RF mount camera that's as small as an EF-M then we will buy it, it's that simple. It may be possible to make an RF body as small as an M6 II since the body is larger than the mount on that camera. However, the lenses will always be bigger no matter what they do. Look at EF-S lenses in comparison to EF-M lenses, they're huge. I think Canon wanted to get away from making two different types of lenses and their only choice now is to make two different types of lenses. I predict their "replacement for EF-M" will be a major compromise and they'll only make a couple of kit RF-S lenses and just try to get people to move to a larger camera and instead they'll probably move to Fuji.
Canon is really screwed if they do and screwed if they don't. There really isn't a good solution outside of them making a bunch of tiny APS-C lenses which they won't do.

 

[Durf]

Those that have never used the M6 Mark II really don't understand what a great little camera this is (with the right lenses).
Over the last year or so I slowly moved away from the Canon system, mainly due to the fact that I'm getting older and the new RF system's lenses that I wanted are too big, heavy, and way to expensive.
I kept the M6 Mark II with a nice collection of good EF-M lenses due to it's compact size and great optical performance with certain lenses. The 32mp sensor is rather amazing to say the least.
I have two M6ii's and they'll likely out last me and my knees and back enjoy them! Sad to see this Canon line being phased out.

 

[SnowMiku]

People may start selling their M gear with this news, it might be a good time to get a bargain in the used market.

 

[Kit Chan]

I had an X-E4 and about 8 months later also added an X-T4...then I became so frustrated with the X-E4's screen issue I sold it and got the X-T30II when it was released this January. Both of those cameras, the X-T4 and X-T30II represent the best Fujifilm has to offer in terms of the camera's autofocusing. I've found both cameras to be pretty unreliable with tracking as the cameras often will be locked on a subject and then go check on something else for a while, before returning or losing the subject entirely. Face Detection is so inconsistent and completely uncontrollable (other than selecting another face it "finds" in the frame) that you should leave that feature off 100% of the time...this is an area the M6II was a monster with. It's so bad that I honestly believe they shouldn't even list it as something the camera can even do.

Unfortunately, it's not JUST with AF-C tracking.....with shooting real estate, I've shot with the 5D Mark IV, M6II, R6, R5, and R3 using Dual Pixel for probably 5+ years. I have maybe missed focus less than 10 times after AF confirmation in some normal/poorly lit rooms. I used the X-T4 and XF10-24 for 3 listings so far and it has missed multiple times in each home I shot. So it's a very big surprise to me, given my experience autofocusing in the typical poor light I come across.

So you may ask "then why do you still use these cameras if they focus as poorly as I say?" Because I've never had more fun using any digital camera than I have using any Fuji camera and lens. It's absolutely fun to take photos and allows me to separate my work gear and fun gear. I don't regret finding the "goldilocks" camera for me from Fuji.

Sounds like I should stick with Canon if I like the AF then. I'm nervous about investing in the M6II with it's shutter shock issues though. Digging into the menus to change between mechanical and electronic shutter don't appeal to me as that just brings me back to one of my biggest complaints about my M200; I spend too much time in menus when just want to flick some exposure dials and take a photo.

 

[LSXPhotog]

Sounds like I should stick with Canon if I like the AF then. I'm nervous about investing in the M6II with it's shutter shock issues though. Digging into the menus to change between mechanical and electronic shutter don't appeal to me as that just brings me back to one of my biggest complaints about my M200; I spend too much time in menus when just want to flick some exposure dials and take a photo.

It depends on what you are trying to focus on. If you're just going to use the camera for landscape, street, travel, I find the cameras very manageable. But whenever I try to focus on things like birds or my dog, the camera lose their minds. Face tracking is totally useless on Fujifilm cameras, however.

 

[Chrisinhouston]

I jumped on the Canon M bandwagon with the very first model, later added an M3 with the EVF and eventually sold those and settled on 2 M5 bodies which I use a lot for travel photography. I own several EF-M lenses as well as lots of other EF ones that I use via the adapter. When you are dealing with international travel and the hassle that goes with bringing carry on items on a flight the M just works better for me. I also own the R and several RF lenses and an aging 7D MkII. But they all have their place, I shoot with the R when doing things locally, especially portraits of family, landscape, macro and astrophotography. The 7D MkII is for sports (I have a lot of high school age grand kids) and for wildlife where I want a faster burst rate. For that I don't mind the APS-C sensor and like the extra reach it gives me with longer lenses.

I am excited at the prospect of a R7 to replace my old DSLR but I have no plans to give up my M5 system as it is smaller than the others I mentioned, lighter and easy to travel with and what's more they produce good quality images.

 

[candyman]

I jumped on the Canon M bandwagon with the very first model, later added an M3 with the EVF and eventually sold those and settled on 2 M5 bodies which I use a lot for travel photography. I own several EF-M lenses as well as lots of other EF ones that I use via the adapter. When you are dealing with international travel and the hassle that goes with bringing carry on items on a flight the M just works better for me. I also own the R and several RF lenses and an aging 7D MkII. But they all have their place, I shoot with the R when doing things locally, especially portraits of family, landscape, macro and astrophotography. The 7D MkII is for sports (I have a lot of high school age grand kids) and for wildlife where I want a faster burst rate. For that I don't mind the APS-C sensor and like the extra reach it gives me with longer lenses.

I am excited at the prospect of a R7 to replace my old DSLR but I have no plans to give up my M5 system as it is smaller than the others I mentioned, lighter and easy to travel with and what's more they produce good quality images.

I concur. Using M5, M6 II (plus a few EF-M lenses) next to R6 and 6D MK II & EF lenses

 

[Kit Chan]

It depends on what you are trying to focus on. If you're just going to use the camera for landscape, street, travel, I find the cameras very manageable. But whenever I try to focus on things like birds or my dog, the camera lose their minds. Face tracking is totally useless on Fujifilm cameras, however.

Seeing as my first paid photography job is a photo album of the family dog, and I'm planning to put up some bird prints for sale, I think I'll take the better tracking.

I am a bit anxious about using electronic shutter mode for shuttershock free photos though, doesn't ES have trouble with artificial lighting?

 

[gregedwards69]

The one thing that the M-naysayers don't understand. We EOS-M owners don't care about EF-M, we care about size. IF Canon can make an RF mount camera that's as small as an EF-M then we will buy it, it's that simple.

Please don't speak for all EOS M owners. Some of us are mere hobbyists who don't have the disposable income to plonk down a considerable chunk of money on moving to a new camera mount. Some of us do care about EF-M and what's going to become of it.

 

[gregedwards69]

People may start selling their M gear with this news, it might be a good time to get a bargain in the used market.

That's what I'm hoping for. Despite what I said about lack of disposable income in my previous post above (which is a temporary setback due to wife's covid related complications), if EF-M bargains come up, I'm more likely to buy those and use them until my camera dies than invest in a whole new system. A little bit of me is tempted to get on original M body and stick my 22mm on it as a "compact" camera. I hear the original M has something special about its colour rendering, which some say was lost in later models. Something to do with digic versions and the original's firmware being closer to EOS and the later model being closer to Powershot's firmware. Apparently, Magic Lantern runs on the original M too.

 

[Czardoom]

People may start selling their M gear with this news, it might be a good time to get a bargain in the used market.

What would we do without people reminding us that we are hearing Canon rumors on a site called Canon Rumors?

It would be less of a cringe if you simply shared whether or not you agreed with the rumor.

As it turns out, people reminding folks that this is a rumor falls on many deaf ears. Just look at how many folks are calling this "news" and are making plans one way or another to either buy an M6 II while they still can or planning on selling off their M gear.

The real question is, what would we do without people like you who feel the need to mock and criticize a perfectly reasonable post?

 

[bf]

M cameras haven't received the Digic X processor and are still offerd at the intriductory price, which is not good. 11-22, 22, 32, 55-200 or 18-150 is about 1.5-2k of investment in lenses, which is not easy to give up for enthusiasts who don't earn anything from photography. I do hope a M6-mk3 is offered or at least the pricing is adjusted for available bodies, which are a generation old.

 

[Act444]

I hear the original M has something special about its colour rendering, which some say was lost in later models. Something to do with digic versions and the original's firmware being closer to EOS and the later model being closer to Powershot's firmware.

I'm one of those who agrees that older Canon sensors had far superior OOC colors, sharpness and color rendition. I don't think it has anything to do with firmware though; I think this change happened when Canon came out with the Dual Pixel technology and tweaked their sensors to answer the critics that were constantly on their back regarding dynamic range. The 5D4 and 7D2 I believe were some of the first cameras to adopt this feature. I notice with my 5D4 and especially with my RP I tend to spend more time in PP fixing and tweaking colors (and sharpness) than I do with my 5DSR and did with my previous 5D3. Even then, I can't quite get it the same (especially with reds). I believe the 5DS series of cameras (2015) was the last DSLR generation to use the older sensor with the "classic colors". I find myself going back to it lately...

The original M (which I had) had the older "classic" sensor. Note, however, that it does focus/track slower than the newer Ms (even with the firmware update).