Further talk about the fate of the EOS M system

mb66energy

EOS R
Dec 18, 2011
1,493
359
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
If they let die the EOS M series they should use there patent with an adjustable flange distance to make adaption of M lenses possible.
But I think EOS M will stay a while and there is some negative headroom to make EOS M cameras still smaller, thinking of a cube shaped EOS M or similar designs which fit still better in a lens compartment than the existing ones.
And I think the M system should stay for a while - it is a great system for me because I do not like ultra wide for everything but I do like it sometimes and a tiny M system is absolutely sufficient quality wise for me! And there are pros who travel a lot: Better to have two M5 or M6ii bodies than one R5 ... as backup ...
 

goldenhusky

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 2, 2016
401
201
Even when the average M user is never likely to buy an R body costing twice as much, and lenses costing twice as much? I think M users are less interested in upgrading to the more expensive R/RF ecosystem. I discount people here as being representative of the larger M segment.

And if Canon does drop it and only gives me the option to ditch all my kit, then when I come to having to replace my Ms as they’re no longer repairable, if Canon doesn’t offer significantly better than Fuji then my M funds will go to them.

you are assuming the RF crop bodies are going to be expensive. What if Canon comes up with similar priced bodies like EF-M mount but with RF mount? And on the Fuji wish you good luck with the price. One thing stopped me from even trying Fuji is their lens prices. If you compare equivalent Fuji lenses with other full frame lenses, they are equal or expensive than the full frame lenses we have with Canon, Nikon or Sony. Fuji sounds like a great system but at a cost disadvantage when compared to other full frame systems. Third party lenses for Fuji is also comparatively less.

I have said this before here and I still believe ditching EF-M mount makes sense from business point of view for Canon because now they can sell the same camera and same lenses with a RF mount to the same set of consumers one more time. Based on Canon' history prior to EF mount they are not afraid to change mount at all. People will suck it up like they suck Apple products :LOL:
 

twoheadedboy

EOS R5
CR Pro
Jan 3, 2018
207
309
Kenosha, WI
And the lenses I bought already - FML I guess. They got my money, no need to support the product anymore. AND thats why I'm out. I'm looking at a bunch of lenses that I'm being told to GFMS with. If this was the case they should have never put out an M6ii. Why put out a camera you won't support lens wise for more than a year? Thats a POS move in my opinion. If I do go FF, which Im not planning to, it most likely wont be with Canon.

The situation is the same now. You can be happy with what you have, or you can completely ditch your system for something else (Canon or otherwise). That has been the situation with the M mount from day 1. For the record I completely agree with you, producing a new better M body when you have no intention on supporting the mount long-term is penny-wise and pound-foolish.

I was strongly considering investing in the M system for my wife's primary camera, and to have something small when my R system isn't feasible or allowed, and now I am second-guessing that. We definitely need more insight from Canon on what they will or won't do with this line.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,190
2,065
And the lenses I bought already - FML I guess. They got my money, no need to support the product anymore. AND thats why I'm out. I'm looking at a bunch of lenses that I'm being told to GFMS with. If this was the case they should have never put out an M6ii. Why put out a camera you won't support lens wise for more than a year? Thats a POS move in my opinion. If I do go FF, which Im not planning to, it most likely wont be with Canon.

You're over-reacting. Not because this would be a bad thing to have happen--you're right, it would be.

But because this is just a damned rumor, not a "for certain" thing.
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,411
3,749
Irving, Texas
And the lenses I bought already - FML I guess. They got my money, no need to support the product anymore. AND thats why I'm out. I'm looking at a bunch of lenses that I'm being told to GFMS with. If this was the case they should have never put out an M6ii. Why put out a camera you won't support lens wise for more than a year? Thats a POS move in my opinion. If I do go FF, which Im not planning to, it most likely wont be with Canon.
Products are not supported forever. None in the world are.

Yeah, they’re putting out a new model. People buying it are probably already in the M system. At any rate, people are not entitled to lifetime support.

When I lived in the desert I had a 1999 Suburban 4x4. I used it for back country trips. 12 years later, GMC quit stocking a whole load of replacement parts. So what? Products come and go.

You are angry or offended that Canon might have decided the M line isn’t viable long term? *sniffle*

Some of you people take business decisions far too personally. Yup, Canon got your money. In exchange, you got everything you’re entitled to and paid for. You aren’t owed any more than that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mpphoto

BeenThere

EOS R
CR Pro
Sep 4, 2012
1,237
662
Eastern Shore
You're over-reacting. Not because this would be a bad thing to have happen--you're right, it would be.

But because this is just a damned rumor, not a "for certain" thing.
The end of a product line has to happen at some point in time. Those buying at the end of a product cycle may not be happy, but as long as you get good service from what you bought then complaining is just gratuitous.
 

Colorado

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 16, 2013
53
152
Some of you people take business decisions far too personally. Yup, Canon got your money. In exchange, you got everything you’re entitled to and paid for. You aren’t owed any more than that.
While this is technically correct it isn't the whole picture. Part of the attraction to a ILC system is the mount and the family of available lenses. Imagine if Canon came out with a high MP R3 next year but it used the RF+ mount and wasn't compatible with any of the RF lenses. And then the R1 comes out and it used the RF++ mount which in turn wasn't compatible with either the EF, RF, or RF+ mount lenses. Did an R5 user who spend thousands of dollars on RF lenses get what they paid for? Yes. Would it be understandable that they could be annoyed by the quick changing of mount systems? Also yes.
 

amorse

EOS RP
Jan 26, 2017
779
1,024
www.instagram.com
Well, this topic got a lot of attention in the rumour from yesterday so no need to re-hash all that. Lots of different opinions in there - all well and good.

The rumoured lack of plans for EOS-M in 2021 here seems to be in contrast with the CR1 rumour from Aug 29 regarding an M7 camera coming in 2021, and admittedly releasing a high-end M camera right before ending support seems like an odd move. With that said, over the last while we've seen rumours of a high-end M7 camera, a high end crop sensor RF body built for speed, and the registration of a camera with a DS model number thought to be an M camera despite DS usually being reserved for EF/EFS/RF mount bodies. I kind of wonder if all those rumours are actually relating to one camera body, and the multiple sources are each reporting the limited information they have and making some assumptions to fill their information gaps. For instance, I wonder if that M7 rumour is coming from a source who knows a mirrorless crop body is coming and assumed it was an M, or if the rumour of the RF crop sensor body is actually the M7. Or it could definitely be just a planning disruption. I guess we'll know eventually!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stu_bert

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
419
447
USA
Here I am, just having seen my first M body in real life and having loved the idea of it, to find out it may be the end of the line. Is this why no one has an M50 in stock in the USA?

Until this past weekend, I was firmly in the camp of 'what is this M system even good for'. I just couldn't get it from the spec sheets and online pics. But seeing one in real life next to my 5D series and seeing how small it is in comparison, yet how it has many features I've become accustomed to on 'real' cameras but in a point and shoot sized body...I get it now. There are a lot of places we go thinking its just not worth to bring the DSLR since we won't be photography focused, but this M sized body would come with if we had one. And so much better than our cell phone!

If they did go to an RF mount instead, which makes sense from a lot of perspectives, I'm worried it just wouldn't be the same. 47mm vs 54mm doesn't sound like a lot, but that is ~20% larger. that will translate directly to the height of the body, though not necessarily the width and thickness. Plus you've got to consider the lens itself won't be as compact either. Wait and see I guess. The good thing is the M series I buy now will likely work for 5-10 more years regardless. And I don't even need a large lens selection. That isn't the idea for me. I have that with my EF system right now. I just want something with better quality and more creative control than my cell phone and most PnS cameras. Maybe that M50 will come back in stock some day...

-Brian
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,411
3,749
Irving, Texas
While this is technically correct it isn't the whole picture. Part of the attraction to a ILC system is the mount and the family of available lenses. Imagine if Canon came out with a high MP R3 next year but it used the RF+ mount and wasn't compatible with any of the RF lenses. And then the R1 comes out and it used the RF++ mount which in turn wasn't compatible with either the EF, RF, or RF+ mount lenses. Did an R5 user who spend thousands of dollars on RF lenses get what they paid for? Yes. Would it be understandable that they could be annoyed by the quick changing of mount systems? Also yes.
Yeah, except your whole premise is flawed. There has not been a bunch of quick mount changes. Reality is far more reliable a world to live in than just making up something completely irrational that will never happen. The ILC market has been hammered unbelievably. Canon will do what needs to be done to survive. I believe Canon stated a couple of years ago that the path forward would be to concentrate on the high end. The low end is getting eaten alive by smartphones.
 

The3o5FlyGuy

eatin'
Jun 8, 2017
41
56
Miami
www.jessedelice.com
I wish Canon would either commit and make more lenses, or do away with the line. Canon already makes a confusing amount of cameras. I don't even know where these fit in comparison with Canon's entry level DSLR's
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
592
678
Even when the average M user is never likely to buy an R body costing twice as much, and lenses costing twice as much? I think M users are less interested in upgrading to the more expensive R/RF ecosystem. I discount people here as being representative of the larger M segment.

And if Canon does drop it and only gives me the option to ditch all my kit, then when I come to having to replace my Ms as they’re no longer repairable, if Canon doesn’t offer significantly better than Fuji then my M funds will go to them.

But some M users are interested in using RF lenses. Bodies like M5. M6 or higher end M are purchased by enthusiasts who might appreciate the option to use the same 100-500, 70-200 or 100mm RF macro (future) they might already have. Also this way some can use M body as backup for R.

So even if 90% will not buy RF lenses, it still makes sense to simplify the lineup and make a common mount.
 

nchoh

EOS RP
Apr 3, 2018
310
196
Calgary
This rumor seems to be in line with all the facts (and rumors) that we know so far. 1) the market for cameras is in huge decline. 2) the next M camera is going to have a SKU(?) that is not of the point and shoot (PS_xxx) but of the regular camera team. I take it to mean that the PS team is being shut down and consolidated in some way or another into a single team for cameras.

Obviously just looking at the trajectory of the the camera market tells us that cost will need to be cut in order to realign to the shrinking market. However, I don't think that Canon has fully fleshed out what it is going to do in terms of the M series camera line.
 

Sibir Lupus

EOS M6 Mark II + EOS M200
Feb 4, 2015
157
112
37
This back and forth with the EOS M's future is getting tiring IMO. Multiple rumors have stated that two M bodies and some EF-M lenses are coming this year. There may not be anything on the current 2021 roadmap due to items coming out this year. And like the article stated, the roadmap may be updated in the 4th quarter of 2020 after those rumored EOS M products are either launched and/or the launch dates are solidified.
 

Etienne

EOS R
Sep 19, 2010
1,465
275
Ottawa Ontario
The M series has been the only APS-C camera that I like. My main cameras were 5D series.
I hope they make at least one high end M before scrapping the project.
The lens line up is small, but the 11-22, 22 f/2 and 32 f/1.4 are the best affordable lenses of their kind on the market.
Give me a compact 85 f/1.8 for the M mount and I can do anything with that tiny, light weight package.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ashmadux and tron

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
373
340
Lots of opinions, but not a lot of physics. If you have an R body the size of an M body, it won't be any better at handling those big RF FF lenses than the M body would. Yes, the lenses will fit, but you won't be able to hold them sensibly. The logic behind making all the M lenses small and light is impeccable. The system works and works well. The lenses vary from quite decent to very good (e.g. 11-22) and they are all quite portable. If they make an M body with Ibis, then a compact mirror lens would make sense for a telephoto. I currently use an old Tamron 500mm f/8 mirror on my M5 and other than the somewhat challenging manual focus and lack of IS, the results are quite good (see attached and note the DOF is about 1/3 of a hummingbird thick). The lens is quite small and easy to hold on the M5. And, yes I have an R5 on order, but it won't replace the M5 and its kit. It will be interesting to see how the IBIS works the mirror lenses, though.
IMG_2543-Edit.jpg
 
Last edited:
<-- start Taboola -->