oh and any talk of the end of the m line just because of an R APSC rumour is nonsense, totally different line
Upvote
0
Canon has supported multiple mounts for YEARS, so it's not unlikely for them to do it in the future. That's not denial, that's just fact . Also, don't forget the CN-E based EF lenses (Cinema EOS lenses ) that are not compatible with the EOS R. I don't see Canon retooling their entire Cinema EOS line just because of RF mount. Though I wouldn't be surprised to see Canon make an RF mount based low end Cinema body in the future.
1Dx, 5D, 5Dsr, 6D, 7D, 90D, 77D, T7i, T7, XXXXD, SL2 (My list may be out of date). Canon has about 11 DSLR bodies out at the same time... so why do you think that they need/want to reduce it to a single mount?
The M line is small and light and fills the needs of a big market segment. Why would Canon suddenly change it's strategy and not go for all segments?
I consider it a foregone conclusion that within a few years, future APS-C cameras will have the R mount. If not, then Canon would be discontinuing the 7 series, and that's not going to happen. So the only question left is whether Canon continues the M line. So the M doesn't have upgradability to the R mount. So what, it didn't have an ungrade path to EF either. EF lenses can be used on the M, EF-M lenses can't be used on an EF mount camera. Since the M series seems to be selling well, what would be Canon's motivation to end it?
I've been following them for a few years as well (2013 onward), and know that Canon can surprise at times. Canon has changed strategies and is now willing to cannibalize DSLR sales to up the specs of upcoming mirrorless cameras. The possible reason we didn't see that happen with the EOS R (lacking specs like the cropped 4K video and missing IBIS) is that it was to late in development for Canon to make major changes without delaying the launch. And those changes to Canon's strategy may be why we're not seeing an EOS M5 Mark II and M6 Mark II until sometime next year.
Indeed ...
As others have already pointed out there are many similarities here to the slow but certain demise of film ...
Film is a format, not a camera system. If we want to compare apples to apples, then lets look at Nikon's 1 series camera system. It was officially discontinued in July of 2018, but only after Nikon had stopped releasing cameras for the system 3 years prior (which I would bet is around the time Nikon shifted to FF mirrorless development). Canon just recently released the M50, and the M5 Mark II and M6 Mark II are in the pipeline for release sometime next year. Now that I think about it, if Canon was going to kill off the EOS M system they would have already done so seeing as the EOS R and RF mount were in development for quite some time.
Think of it as a pipeline.Think of it as a pipeline.
Canon are going to have to make a collosal investment to produce a full suite of RF lenses - primes, zooms, super-large whites, tilt-shift.
Yes, there are no doubt going to be some lenses which have been in development for years popping out of the pipeline, but new development will focus on the RF line
Over the next few years flipping mirrors will become as antiquated as plates of silver nitrate
And there will be no need to produce two versions of every lens - nor to artificially divide the mirrorlesd lens population into two - half available in RF and the other half in EF-M
Canon are not nuts - they will develop a single system covering all needs - a fabulous value proposition to customers - any lens fits any camera, putting all their R&D into that
That's my prediction for what it's worth ...
Yes Canon does care focus more on mirrorless than they used to, but that does not mean that they are going to change anything else about their business strategy, complaints on CR or other forums/channels, pitching the idea of switching to other brands in limited numbers, etc. is not a reason to do so.
The reason EF/EF-S lenses can be used on the EF-M mount is because the M mount has a reduced flange distance which allows for the introduction of an adapter to maintain the focal point on the sensor. The R mount also has a reduced flange distance, so there is no room for an adapter. The EF-M/EF adapter was an easy way for Canon to market the M. When the M was introduced, there were only 2 lenses available, the 18-55 and the 22. With the adapter, you could use any EF* lenses that you own, giving the camera far more versatility. Now there are a number of EF-M lenses available and so the adapter is no longer "needed". If you used the M as a backup camera, this sucks. I use the M as an easy to carry camera system, so I don't care.The difference is that EF lenses could be used on the M but the R lenses cannot be used on the M so you can't just get an M body to add to your kit with a simple adapter like you could with the EF system. Don't know the Canon thought process for this but I am sure they looked at it long and hard before making the R mount configuration.
You are violating the forum rules by staying on topic...Since the title of the thread has a question mark and it's characterized as a CR1 allow me to answer:
NO (CR2.99)
Currently on Canon USA you can buy 22 DSLR's:-1Dx, 5D, 5Dsr, 6D, 7D, 90D, 77D, T7i, T7, XXXXD, SL2 (My list may be out of date). Canon has about 11 DSLR bodies out at the same time... so why do you think that they need/want to reduce it to a single mount?
The M line is small and light and fills the needs of a big market segment. Why would Canon suddenly change it's strategy and not go for all segments?
Currently on Canon USA you can buy 22 DSLR's:-
The reason EF/EF-S lenses can be used on the EF-M mount is because the M mount has a reduced flange distance which allows for the introduction of an adapter to maintain the focal point on the sensor. The R mount also has a reduced flange distance, so there is no room for an adapter. The EF-M/EF adapter was an easy way for Canon to market the M. When the M was introduced, there were only 2 lenses available, the 18-55 and the 22. With the adapter, you could use any EF* lenses that you own, giving the camera far more versatility. Now there are a number of EF-M lenses available and so the adapter is no longer "needed". If you used the M as a backup camera, this sucks. I use the M as an easy to carry camera system, so I don't care.
The EF-M/EF adapter is much like the nifty R/EF adapter that allows use of a filter between the camera and EF lenses. It's only good for as long as you use EF lenses on your R camera. It will not work for R lenses, so once you no longer are using EF lenses on your R camera it becomes a $300 paperweight.
That's imo why there has to be EOS-R with an APS-C sensor, or in a reverse - EOS-M with an EF-R mount. I wonder, how much bigger/bulkier would M5/6 be, carrying EF-R adapter (47 to 54mm diameter increase), and if EF-Rs lens designed for this APS-C combination could be any smaller that their EF-R counterpart?