I agree that the best strategy is to keep the M series. My guess is that the APS-C R cameras will replace the Rebel DSLRs and perhaps include one higher end model. The M series has always been aimed at those wanting the most portable and light ILC system. The fact that some higher-end users think it should be a full fledged system with all the same lenses as the EF or now the RF mount is pretty much irrelevant. Canon has always been smart enough to know that the number of buyers who want duplicate systems must be very low, so they have kept the lenses in the M system to a minimum ( and kept them small and light) - at least that is my opinion, since I have no market research info.
Canon will release an APS-C RF mount camera(s) later in 2022 [CR3]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
It's as full as it needs to be, really. There's a standard zoom (one current, one discontinued), an ultrawide zoom, a superzoom, a telezoom, a couple of fast(ish) primes, and a macro lens. For everything else, there's an adapter to access the full EF system.
There are three levels of APSC models now. Why not with an R mount? Canon is not going to cede that market to Fuji, Nikon or Sony. It needs an "entry level" offering with kit price hovering around $500. Until the supply chain settles down, don't expect to see such models or appropriate lenses until late 2022 or even 2023.
The point is that you get more reach. Assuming that any new Crop R body would have at least 24 MP, there is nothing in Canon FF lineup that has the 61 MP that would equal such a crop body's pixel density.
Personally, I have been doing more Bird photography, including some BIF, so I pulled the trigger and got the R6 for its advanced AF. It was really more than I wanted to spend - and the R5 is well beyond my budget. Having just bought the new RF 100-400, I have already been disappointed in a number of situations where I needed more reach (or more MPs), as the R6 is only around 7.8 MPs in crop mode. So, I eagerly await a crop R camera. I hope the rumor is true.
What market have they ceded?
Canon U.S.A., Inc. | EOS M200 EF-M 15-45mm IS STM Kit
Create limitless memories with the EOS M200 interchangeable lens camera. Equipped with a 24.1 Megapixel CMOS (APS-C) sensor, Eye Detection AF and enhanced Dual Pixel CMOS AF, the EOS M200 makes it easy to capture high-quality images and videos, all in a compact, mirrorless design.
www.usa.canon.com
Slots #2-7 on the domestic best-selling ILC list belong to Canon. Note the other clear message in that list – the DSLR is far from dead, unless people believe that dead products are best-sellers.
Would that be the same 'huge market' that was clamoring for a 7DIII...that Canon decided not to make?
I'm always skeptical when people claim to know more about the market than a global, multibillion dollar company with mountains of market research data.
I believe the 7D Mk III wasn't made because there was a lack of customers and interested people waiting for it. imho the end of the 7D II life-cycle just coincided with the release of the RF mount. The 7D II came out in 2014 and considering a normal 4-year cycle it should've ended in 2018 with a new 7d III. The release of the RF mount, as we now know, was actually the death of of EF mount and their cameras.
So, my point is: just because the 7D III was never released, it doesn't necessarily state that there wasn't a market for it or that there isn't a market for an R7.
In retrospective: imho Canon should have released a 7d III in 2017 or early 2018. It would have had enough time to sell and given Canon the appropriate time to develop a scheme for R-ASPC strategy while having satisfied customers.
Last edited:
But what about M mount big whites? 5X macro? 4 versions of a 70-200 equivalent? 2.8 standard zoom? I'm kidding of course. People who say the M mount never had a full lineup just don't seem to understand that it has a full lineup for what it is intended to do. A lot of these vloggers are using them with a 16mm or 22mm prime, and that's it. There is enough to put together a walk about kit for street/environmental photos. And an adapter to get any EF glass you may find you "need". M series is not an alternative to the DSLR of yore (going way back to 2020, lol). Its a superb small format system on its own, a fully featured travel system, and a great compliment to a DSLR you may happen to have.
This came up in another discussion recently. The DSLR isn't dead because the $500-700 'real camera' market for entry level cameras isn't dead yet. A lot of folks, though declining in numbers, still want a 'real' camera which makes the M series too much of a P&S looking camera for them. But don't want to spend beyond what a 90D kit or Rebel kit may cost. Once there is an RF model in that range, that is what they'll be buying. Until then, the entry level DSLR lives.What market have they ceded?
Canon U.S.A., Inc. | EOS M200 EF-M 15-45mm IS STM Kit
Create limitless memories with the EOS M200 interchangeable lens camera. Equipped with a 24.1 Megapixel CMOS (APS-C) sensor, Eye Detection AF and enhanced Dual Pixel CMOS AF, the EOS M200 makes it easy to capture high-quality images and videos, all in a compact, mirrorless design.
Slots #2-7 on the domestic best-selling ILC list belong to Canon. Note the other clear message in that list – the DSLR is far from dead, unless people believe that dead products are best-sellers.
View attachment 201467
If the Canons CEOs read this site and maybe a few others, they KNOW that people want an R-ASPC camera. They could save the money for an expansive marketing research team, spent this cash for developing one or two lenses for each APS-C line (M and RF) and make everybody happy 
While I am not sure about how likely a 7D-type of RF aps-c camera would be, I also don't think that there will be "RF-S" lenses.
There are already RF lenses which require some stretching in post-processing on a full-frame sensor. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon will release further lenses with focal lengths which are kind of typical for aps-c sensors, but which also work on full frame with significant post-processing.
Most of the lenses released so far which fit into that category are rather light and lower-cost, and not that different in terms of size and weight from EF-S lenses. A dedicated set of RF-S lenses would likely have no significant advantage in terms of weight or cost, and wouldn't work on full frame.
Like that Canon could address the low-end full-frame market, and the same lenses would be a still lightweight and cost-effective solution for typical DXX-DXXX customers.
As for the 7D crowd, how many are really using that type of camera with cheaper EF-S lenses? I would guess it's a minority, and that's also why I definitely do not expect to see a 7D-type camera with M-mount.
Consider that 1) over 40% of the ILCs produced this year were DSLRs, 2) Canon and Nikon are the only major manufacturers making DSLRs, and 3) Canon has a much larger market share than Nikon. That means Canon dominates the DSLR market segment without strong competition – generally a desirable place for a company to be. What’s the incentive for Canon to try and shift that segment to one where there’s lots of competition?
Quite agree, there's little or no need to expand the range of lenses for M mount, there are more than sufficient for the market the cameras are aimed at.
The handful of people posting on Internet forums are essentially irrelevant as far as the broader market goes.If the Canons CEOs read this site and maybe a few others, they KNOW that people want an R-ASPC camera. They could save the money for an expansive marketing research team, spent this cash for developing one or two lenses for each APS-C line (M and RF) and make everybody happy
Now that is an interesting take on those "needs a lot of digital correction" lenses.
Yes, they'd probably be quite good in either crop mode (on an R5 say) or on a sensor that only has crop mode. Much less correction is needed towards the center of the image, so crop mode basically amounts to getting rid of most of the part of the image that is badly distorted (before correction).;
The incentive is probably to get people into the RF system, and buy RF lenses. Much as I like DSLRs, the future for them is bleak. Canon may believe that current Canon DSLR users are likely to consider switching to Sony or Nikon if/when they go mirrorless, so it makes sense to wean them off DSLRs and steer them towards RF.
I'm not sure if there's much more that they could do and keep that constant outside diameter.
I normally use the Tamron 18-200 on my M6-II--it's a bit fatter but not ridiculously so. And I can certainly put a EF 100-400 L II on with an adapter. Strangely I rarely (but not quite never) use a standard EF-M lens--I own four of them.
Just put the RF 1.4x on the R6. I've been doing it for bird photography, and have been posting some of mine and my wife's bird photos on the Bird Portrait thread taken with it and the RF 100-400mm + RF 1.4x on the R6, and I think the results are as good as from my RF 100-500mm on the R5. OK, you might say, you are at f/11 with the 1.4x on an f/8. But, don't worry. Each pixel of the R6 is 1.5x1.5 larger than that of the R5 so that you can double the iso and have the same signal/noise for the pixel, and your image has been enlarged by 1.4x. Basically, the 20 Mpx R6 with a 1.4xTC has a very similar field of view and similar reach and S/N as the R5 in crop mode: see https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/show-your-bird-portraits.1280/page-1237#post-918531
Olicom was in that position in 1999. Increasing market share and good margins. But in a market (Token Ring networking) that folded upon them. They were basically bankrupt nine months later (sold the R&D department for one dollar).
I'm not saying that the DSLR APS-C market is falling apart, but Canon needs to keep a very fixed eye on where the emergency door is, in case that a collapse should appear to happen.
That sounds plausible and is frequently given as a rationale, but with the popularity of double lens kits and the overall 1.4:1 lens:camera ratio, the reality is that most people never buy another lens beyond what came with the camera (and the popularity of the nifty 50 suggests that if they do buy one, it’s a really cheap one).
I think Canon is well aware that the “upgrade path“ is a forum user phenomenon that’s not reflected in real world purchases. Remember the forum rage and disbelief when Canon brought out the RF mount that was incompatible with EF-M? Canon has actual data on the mountain, we are just rummaging around in our mole hill here.
Similar threads
