Current unreleased Canon gear from certification agencies

[Canon Rumors Guy]

Below are unreleased Canon cameras that have appeared at certification agencies. We expect the PowerShot G3 X Mark II and PowerShot G7 X Mark III to be amongst these cameras. There could also be a follow-up to the EOS M5 and the EOS M100 as well.

PC2355 – (Possibly the PowerShot G3 X Mark II)

Digital camera
made in Japan
Equipped with Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 4.1


PC2358 – (Possibly the EOS M5 Replacement)

Digital camera
Equipped with Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 4.1
Battery: LP-E17? (7.5 Wh)


PC 2366 – (Possibly the PowerShot G7 X Mark III)

Digital camera
Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 4.2 loading
Battery: NB-13L
See downloadable WM601 PDF for details on this camera


PC2367 – (Possibly the EOS M100 Replacement)

Digital camera
Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 4.2 loading
Battery: LP-E12 (7.2 V 875 mAh)

Continue reading...

 

[crazyrunner33]

The Google Drive camera files for EOS Utility that Nokishita posted are interesting.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U_yWo8OPCQJPJZeQNJDTPzleWVSdO55B/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w5NpBKOnvvwEhQ9dor8KWmaD_BO3cl4M/view

Edit: Both cameras appear to use the same sensor as the M50. The RAW size is listed as the same size as the M50.

 

[rrcphoto]

The Google Drive camera files for EOS Utility that Nokishita posted are interesting.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U_yWo8OPCQJPJZeQNJDTPzleWVSdO55B/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w5NpBKOnvvwEhQ9dor8KWmaD_BO3cl4M/view

Edit: Both cameras appear to use the same sensor as the M50. The RAW size is listed as the same size as the M50.

are you seeing a "true sensor size" or just the 6000x4000? I just see the 6000x4000 unless i'm missing something.

 

[crazyrunner33]

Correct, the number which is the same as the 24.1 megapixel M50 in 4:3 mode. The medium and small sizes are also identical.

Edit: the .1 for 24.1 megapixel comes from the unused pixels(6012x4008 vs 6000x4000 in the final image)

 

[Woody]

I am curious about the EOS-M5 MkII.

But will only upgrade if the improvements are substantial...

 

[danfaz]

Me, too. At minimum I hope it has a fully articulating flippy screen (biggest need).

I am curious about the EOS-M5 MkII.

 

[LSXPhotog]

I would love to see a new M5 Mark II. I will probably pull the trigger on a refurbished M5 in the next few weeks if I don't know the future of the M5 Mark II.

 

[Ryanite]

Ah a shame it's LP-E17, was hoping for a larger LP-E6 aps-c mirrorless M mount since can isn't doing an aps-c R varient.

The small size just seems restrictive for a top end EOS M.

 

[niraj_photo]

I am interested in the G7x MKIII

 

[padam]

Ah a shame it's LP-E17, was hoping for a larger LP-E6 aps-c mirrorless M mount since can isn't doing an aps-c R varient.

The small size just seems restrictive for a top end EOS M.

With the introduction of the EOS RP using the same battery, it doesn't make sense both in terms of size and extra cost. The original M5 body only MSRP was close to 1000$, maybe this time it might be a little lower, like 900$ or so.
One question mark is: will it keep the existing design or switch to a fully articulating screen?

 

[Hector1970]

I haven't really considered buying an EOS M but its users seem to be very happy and it sells well in Japan.
I find it an oddity.
To me it felt like a stop gap until they had an EOS R APS-C version (which may never come now unless they do a 7D version). It's perhaps been more successful than Canon expected or planned for.
The EOS M has a nice range of lens but (I'm not sure about this bit) is not compatible currently with EOS R lens.
This has been one of the advantages of the EF system that all non EF-S lens worked on the APS-C camera.
I'm an Olympus user too and the lens are great but the micro 4/3 sensor can only be so good.
APS-C would have been in retrospect a much better sensor size for Olympus to build their system around.
I think if the EOS M was R lens compatible I'd be more open to buying one.
As it stands I wouldn't go down the route of having a M set of lens incompatible with other cameras.
Yes I could use EF lens with an adapter but it would I expect be quite unbalanced with L lens.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

[QUOTE="Hector1970, post: 772382,
The EOS M has a nice range of lens but (I'm not sure about this bit) is not compatible currently with EOS R lens.
[/QUOTE]

Not compatible currently and will never be. Also M lenses will never fit the R mount. In theory an adapter is possible that has glass inside, but such an adapter will affect the quality badly.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I am curious about the EOS-M5 MkII.

But will only upgrade if the improvements are substantial...

I really hope the M5 II will be something like a X-T3, a bit better built than the current M5.
It's disappointing they decided to use the same LP-E17 battery. Will be another camera with 200 shots
battery life.

 

[BillB]

I haven't really considered buying an EOS M but its users seem to be very happy and it sells well in Japan.
I find it an oddity.
To me it felt like a stop gap until they had an EOS R APS-C version (which may never come now unless they do a 7D version). It's perhaps been more successful than Canon expected or planned for.
The EOS M has a nice range of lens but (I'm not sure about this bit) is not compatible currently with EOS R lens.
This has been one of the advantages of the EF system that all non EF-S lens worked on the APS-C camera.
I'm an Olympus user too and the lens are great but the micro 4/3 sensor can only be so good.
APS-C would have been in retrospect a much better sensor size for Olympus to build their system around.
I think if the EOS M was R lens compatible I'd be more open to buying one.
As it stands I wouldn't go down the route of having a M set of lens incompatible with other cameras.
Yes I could use EF lens with an adapter but it would I expect be quite unbalanced with L lens.

Canon seems to have made a clear choice not to have lens compatibility between the M and the R systems. The M lenses are relatively inexpensive and slow, a sign that price plays a big role in Canon's thinking about the M line.

 

[Woody]

Canon seems to have made a clear choice not to have lens compatibility between the M and the R systems. The M lenses are relatively inexpensive and slow, a sign that price plays a big role in Canon's thinking about the M line.

They offer the 32mm f/1.4 and 22mm f/2.... So lens speed is not necessarily slow.

Rather, I will describe M lenses as small, lightweight and relatively inexpensive.

If Canon comes up with a RF-mount APS-C camera, the lenses will be larger and more expensive. They'll lose customers like me.

 

[Danielx64]

I am interested in the G7x MKIII

Same, was going to get The g7x mark 2 but decided to wait for this one.