Is a Canon EOS R100 coming next year? A budget EOS R APS-C camera [CR1]

[Curahee]

If there is an M form factor I would like some sort of viewfinder. Using the back screens is a real pain in the sun for me.

 

[bergstrom]

For crying out loud, just make the RP2 already!

 

[Skyscraperfan]

For somebody like me, who hardly ever shoots moving subjects, the main advantage of mirrorless cameras is the IBIS. So all those cheap mirrorless cameras without any IBIS do not make sense for me. They have a lot of disadvantages compared to DSLRs like the lack of an OVF and high battery consumption.

 

[John Wilde]

Is the R10 not entry level enough?

R10 with kit lens: $1,099
M50 II with kit lens: $700

 

[snapshot]

Every year I go on a multi-day backcountry hiking trip. Early on I carried a 5D Mark II, then a 5DsR with a telephoto, macro, and a wide angle lens. As I got older I wanted my weight down, but I didn't want to compromise quality. I eventually went with a SL1 which created some saleable images for me, but I hated the noise at higher ISOs.

I resisted going in on the M series for quite some time because I felt that Canon just didn't offer the lens lineup I needed. Finally, I went in on an M5 just because every ounce counts when hiking. I picked up the 11-22, 18-150, 55-200. The 11-22 is pretty good, I'm not really a fan of the others. My biggest use case for my cameras is landscape so the wider the better. I got pretty good at stitching M5 images while the camera was balanced on a trekking pole. Here is an example of that.

Mirror Lake Reflections - Scenic Landscape, Nature and Wildlife Photography

I wanted to choose a backcountry site that was more out of the way than during my previous trips to Rocky Mountain National Park. Mirror Lake is generally accessible from the far northwestern corner of the park which is a couple hour drive from Trail Ridge. From there it was about a 5-6 mile...

www.journeyoflight.com

I then found the Laowa 9mm and fell in love with wide angle all over again. I picked up the M6 II which I think is a very capable camera and so easy to pull out and capture images. In fact, I frequently have my 5DsR on a tripod with my 11-24 f/4l and I grab the M6 with the Laowa and capture better images because I'm unburdened by the weight.

While I like the R line, for me it's going backwards on the weight a tad. I know it's lighter and very capable (I own an R5 and have preordered an R7), but the M series had brought back a little of the fun for me. Plus it has the quality I need to create saleable images. If the M line dies, so be it, my M6 II and Laowa will continue to function regardless. With that being said, I personally would love to see the M series continue in some form.

In the end, if I have to choose water over a camera, I'll choose water every time. The M series just enabled me to have a camera and still go quite a distance on my hikes while capturing some memorable images.

My daughter is currently using the sl1 + sigma 18-250 for her hiking photography. In strong daylight the images are quite good, however as you point out things get noisy as the evening comes. I have been wondering what the best thing to do for her is.
* sl2/sl3 - i think have a better sensor.
* m50 ii + ef adapter - she wants a view finder & hot shoe, so no m6 ii. also no ef-m lens competes in focal range
* r10 + adapter, might be similar to m50 ii, but with better auto focus?
* Fuji X-H2S + new lens, much more expensive but outside of EF system that I use and I am not sure she would care about rolling shutter.
Ideas?

 

[t.linn]

I wouldn't blame EOS-M owners for being disgruntled but it seems fair to point out that there was reason to be skeptical about the system from the start, which is why people have been predicting the system's demise from the day it was introduced. It seemed intentionally limited to protect Canon's DSLR line—a typical Canon move. No one could look at the EOS-M lineup and reasonably believe that it was the future of Canon mirrorless once DSLRs sunsetted. Since its introduction, people who have bought into the system have vacillated between defiantly pointing out that the system isn't dead and blaming anyone who predicts its demise as the cause of it. The bottom line is that the elimination of EOS-M makes more sense now than it did the day it was introduced. I don't wish for it but I don't think anyone should be surprised if it happens—and good luck getting any compensation from Canon.

As an aside, it is an interesting and telling detail that EOS-M was designed by the PowerShot team. I hadn't read that before.

 

[entoman]

The question is: will the rumored R100 have an evf or not. My guess is that it won't.

It's rumoured to have either an EVF or not to have an EVF, just choose your favourite rumour and one of them might even happen! Or not.

inventarumour.com

 

[derrald]

My daughter is currently using the sl1 + sigma 18-250 for her hiking photography. In strong daylight the images are quite good, however as you point out things get noisy as the evening comes. I have been wondering what the best thing to do for her is.
* sl2/sl3 - i think have a better sensor.
* m50 ii + ef adapter - she wants a view finder & hot shoe, so no m6 ii. also no ef-m lens competes in focal range
* r10 + adapter, might be similar to m50 ii, but with better auto focus?
* Fuji X-H2S + new lens, much more expensive but outside of EF system that I use and I am not sure she would care about rolling shutter.
Ideas?

I guess if I were starting from near zero, but I had the sigma or the ability to borrow (or have lenses "gifted" from you when you upgrade!) EF lenses, I would personally go with R10 plus adapter. The R10 looks like a great camera and I thought about getting one, but since I'm getting the R7 I figured I'd see how the weight on that fairs first. Canon is seems to be all in on the R line now so it's probably ready for the future.

With all that being said, there are probably deals to be had on M cameras and EF lenses. I know I've seen some dumping their gear to move to RF.

On a side note, my daughter's hiking kit is currently a 50D and an 18-200 ef-s lens. She takes it on day hikes, but it stays in the car for the backcountry treks. She's probably smarter than me in that regard!

 

[neuroanatomist]

Is the R10 not entry level enough?

R10 with kit lens: $1,099
M50 II with kit lens: $700

M200 with kit lens: $549

 

[dilbert]

You might want to try something from Olympus/OM. The sensor is smaller but some of the cameras border on the miniscule. As for water vs camera decision, been there, done that. The battle against weight is relentless.

The lens options for Olympus aren't as good and the system is not price competitive.

 

[mxwphoto]

Looking at the RF mount inner diameter, 54mm is only 7mm bigger than the 47mm of M mount. Canon can easily slap it on a M size body. I made a mock up of what it may look like below with accurate mount size depiction based on M6 II body. It's not quite as aesthetically pleasing as the M mount, but it works.

Moreover, I think a larger RF mount may actually be good for APSC as new lenses (not M ported ones) can break the 61mm lens diameter limit and go up to around 67mm while still keeping the lens barrel straight and maintaining the M lens design language which I like. It can also allow for brighter optics. (APSC 50mm f1.2 anyone?)

If the R100 turns out to be R10 without EVF for $750 I think that will check a lot of boxes for people.

 

[dilbert]

I wouldn't blame EOS-M owners for being disgruntled but it seems fair to point out that there was reason to be skeptical about the system from the start, which is why people have been predicting the system's demise from the day it was introduced. It seemed intentionally limited to protect Canon's DSLR line—a typical Canon move. No one could look at the EOS-M lineup and reasonably believe that it was the future of Canon mirrorless once DSLRs sunsetted. Since its introduction, people who have bought into the system have vacillated between defiantly pointing out that the system isn't dead and blaming anyone who predicts its demise as the cause of it. The bottom line is that the elimination of EOS-M makes more sense now than it did the day it was introduced. I don't wish for it but I don't think anyone should be surprised if it happens—and good luck getting any compensation from Canon.

As an aside, it is an interesting and telling detail that EOS-M was designed by the PowerShot team. I hadn't read that before.

EOS-M has a total combined package size that is the most friendly for those hiking long treks and those who don't want the burden of a large camera while tourist sight seeing. The RF-s replacement (11-55) is not going to be smaller than the EF-M 11-22 however I can see a lot of tourists wanting a 11-55.

 

[dilbert]

Moreover, I think a larger RF mount may actually be good for APSC as new lenses (not M ported ones) can break the 61mm lens diameter limit and go up to around 67mm while still keeping the lens barrel straight and maintaining the M lens design language which I like. It can also allow for brighter optics. (APSC 50mm f1.2 anyone?)

People choosing EOS-M aren't doing so because they want big lenses with wide apertures.

 

[jam05]

Makes sense to unify the lines *if* Canon can hit the same price/size point that made the M successful.

Its not merely price point. The M6 mk 2 fits and calibrates perfectly on the new portable gimbals without the problem of protruding EFVs slamming into gimbals during alignment. Those that never use gimbals and create content this way simply dont get that. Canon does. The reason that they took the time to squash CR once again.

 

[jam05]

I wouldn't blame EOS-M owners for being disgruntled but it seems fair to point out that there was reason to be skeptical about the system from the start, which is why people have been predicting the system's demise from the day it was introduced. It seemed intentionally limited to protect Canon's DSLR line—a typical Canon move. No one could look at the EOS-M lineup and reasonably believe that it was the future of Canon mirrorless once DSLRs sunsetted. Since its introduction, people who have bought into the system have vacillated between defiantly pointing out that the system isn't dead and blaming anyone who predicts its demise as the cause of it. The bottom line is that the elimination of EOS-M makes more sense now than it did the day it was introduced. I don't wish for it but I don't think anyone should be surprised if it happens—and good luck getting any compensation from Canon.

As an aside, it is an interesting and telling detail that EOS-M was designed by the PowerShot team. I hadn't read that before.

Another zealot that Canon has face palmed more than once for nearly a decade. The bottom line is that Canon has no intention of ending the M series. No body cares about "compensation". Same whining from non mobile creators that we have listened to for nearly a decade now. I wouldnt go believing the same crap CR has been writing for nearly ten years now. Simply BS.

 

[jam05]

Another CR attempt at the same recycled rumor. You are a year ahead of yourself. The R10 was supposedly the "

On the contrary, I think EOS M users have reason to be more disgruntled than DSLR users: DSLR users are able to adapt their EF and EF-S lenses to the RF system; EOS M users cannot adapt theirs, so their loss goes deeper, it seems to me.

I was under the impression that EOS M cameras (the M50 in particular) were popular with vloggers and YouTubers. So, potentially, a group of people with more influence than their number alone might suggest. Even if they have not invested in a range of lenses with potential use outside of vlogging, at some point they might want a new camera body and at that point, p*d off to discover they're having to replace more than just the camera, give full vent to their displeasure to all their admiring followers.

Eos M users dont need to adapt anything. There are plenty of 3rd party lenses. Guess you didnt get Canon's latest face palm to CR. They have no intention of ending the M series any time soon. This year or next year. You may even expect a new M series camera in 2023

 

[reefroamer]

On the contrary, I think EOS M users have reason to be more disgruntled than DSLR users: DSLR users are able to adapt their EF and EF-S lenses to the RF system; EOS M users cannot adapt theirs, so their loss goes deeper, it seems to me.

I was under the impression that EOS M cameras (the M50 in particular) were popular with vloggers and YouTubers. So, potentially, a group of people with more influence than their number alone might suggest. Even if they have not invested in a range of lenses with potential use outside of vlogging, at some point they might want a new camera body and at that point, p*d off to discover they're having to replace more than just the camera, give full vent to their displeasure to all their admiring followers.

The M lenses have never been adaptable to anything, nor did Canon ever even imply such. Anyone who has ever bought into the EOSM system (me included) thinking they could adapt their M lenses to other Canon bodies now or in the future either didn’t care or was not paying attention. The only adaptation has always been via an adapter for the M bodies that let them use the EF and EFS lenses. The EOSM system has stood alone since Day 1, and done that quite successfully. I don’t think that’s going to change.

 

[jam05]

Canon will more than likely release another M series this fall. Much to the dissapointment of another CR decade long campaign. CR is most widely known as the M series haters at this point. Quite obviously envious of the young content creator market that they just cant seem to peg.

 

[davidcl0nel]

The question is: will the rumored R100 have an evf or not. My guess is that it won't.

If the R100 has a EVF, than there will be a R1000 without.
I really think, there will be the tinyest possible "box" camera like the old EOS M1 without anything. I don't follow the M line, know now there was a M6-2 too, and I am wondering because this is also 400g. I think it can be a lot lighter "today". A mobile phone weights about 150g and has also a big screen on it and a high performance processor. Yes, no "big" sensor, but I think 200-250g must be possible today, if they really want it. But yeah, maybe it is impractible even if u use only a M22mm (as RF) prime...

 

[jam05]

The M lenses have never been adaptable to anything, nor did Canon ever even imply such. Anyone who has ever bought into the EOSM system (me included) thinking they could adapt their M lenses to other Canon bodies now or in the future either didn’t care or was not paying attention. The only adaptation has always been via an adapter for the M bodies that let them use the EF and EFS lenses. The EOSM system has stood alone since Day 1, and done that quite successfully. I don’t think that’s going to change.

Yeah, nobody needs to adapt. There are other manufacturers that produce excellent M series lenses. Canon doesnt mind, neither did Sony when they released their mirrorless cameras with only about 3 lenses for nearly five years.