It looks like 2021 will be the last year for the EOS M lineup [CR2]

[slclick]

If Canon is going to kill off the EF-M mount, Canon should come up with a replacement system comparable in terms of size(lenses and camera) in R mount. Otherwise, the APS-C R mount may be DOA. People will go for the RP instead, except the birders.

If Sigma can make a FF body as small or smaller than most M series bodies, Canon can surely do a few RF-Crop bodies for travel and smaller handed folx. After all, Japanese Canon users LOVE the M series size.

 

[slclick]

Why would Canon not releasing something else stop your M5 from working when you travel?

Exactly, we see this sentiment over and over as if you simply cannot use a camera system for more than a few years? Rubbish. (Or is it, GAS is just too powerful and you have to have the latest?) 5D3 user here, lol.

 

[Chig]

It's not as bad as it seems:

View attachment 194892
Left: M50II + EFM 32 f/1.4 ($699 + $479 = $1178) | Right: RP + RF 50 f/1.8 ($999 + $199 = $1198) (recent RP refurbished deal was at $687)

Look carefully at the above and tell me if the size and price differences are worth dedicating an entire system for.

Yep and Canon could produce a much more compact R camera for those who love tiny cameras but I doubt any cheap bodies like the Rebel line will be made as Smartphones are what the mass market mostly prefers for family and social media pics . Perhaps an affordable one aimed at photography students ?
From now on the emphasis will be catering for professionals and enthusiasts as this is a stable and profitable market .

I suggest the 2 aps-c R bodies will be :

• a super compact high end body for those wanting small form factor and mostly wide angle/normal compact lenses
• a 7d style body (probably just the R6 fitted with a crop sensor from the 90D/M6 ii) aimed at sports/wildlife users (like the current 7Dii owners) who will mostly use it with long telephotos

 

[Chig]

Exactly, we see this sentiment over and over as if you simply cannot use a camera system for more than a few years? Rubbish. (Or is it, GAS is just too powerful and you have to have the latest?) 5D3 user here, lol.

Yep current top M bodies are very capable and will last a long time

 

[Chig]

It's very hard to match, much less beat, an M body + 22mm or 11-22mm on a bang-for-buck or bang-for-size/weight basis. Either is just an awesome and highly portable combo. Canon was never going to fill out the M lens lineup in a way that would compete with EF or RF. But I wish they would keep it around along with 2-3 good but affordable primes and a couple good but affordable stabilized zooms.

Canon could easily produce an RF35mm pancake lens and a RF17-35mm zoom at reasonable prices and small size as well as a M body size R camera so would that suit your needs ?

 

[woodman411]

Then some commercial observations:
- Sigma decided that the ML APS-C and M4/3 market had room for their Contemporary f/1.4 trio which was introduced in Fuji, Sony, and M4/3 mounts. Shortly after these lenses became available in EF-M mount they became backordered. And shortly after that they became backordered in ALL mounts, a situation that persisted for months.

Backordered doesn't necessarily mean high sales, it could be limited production or scarcity marketing tactics. Do you know actual Sigma unit sales (ideally broken down by system)? This is more important than seeing something backordered.

And some speculations:
- While the profit per M camera likely is much lower than per R unit, it is still profit, and the unit volume is MUCH higher. This leads me to believe that it is highly unlikely that Canon will abandon the M system.

Never seen the per unit earnings, nor the breakdown between M and RF sales, but apparently you have, please do share this special insight, I would *love* to see them. Also, please do not quote Amazon sales ranking or BCN monthly reports, they are meaningless next to worldwide yearly sales which are not affected by month-to-month fluctuations and specific geo markets.

- I infer that Sigma thought there was a market for high quality EF-M primes. The earlier lengthy backorder situation leads me to conclude that the demand was significantly higher than Sigma estimated. From this I believe that while some M buyers indeed saw the low end bodies with kit zooms as an inexpensive upgrade from a smartphone, there are customers (like me) who see M5 and M6 as the core of a new small and lightweight system that can generate very high quality images.

As you mentioned, Sigma makes the same lenses for two other systems, investment is minimal versus a ground-up dedicated design. In other words, it is not a strong endorsement of the M system. If the implication is that third party lenses mean a healthy system, look no further than the now defunct NEX system or the increasingly irrelevant A mount.

So it seems like players in the photo marketplace have more faith in the M system than a lot of the posters in this thread.

Can you blame us? From Canon's own financial statements, the DSLR entry crop market has collapsed, would mirrorless entry crop be immune? I suspect not - most people satisfied with budget crop bodies and kit lenses are the same type that will be satisfied with a phone cam. Economies of scale dictate the need for low-cost high-volume base to support the high-cost low-volume performance variants. Unless the M200 and other low-cost M bodies are thriving, the writing is on the wall, just like it was for DSLR crop.

 

[Skux]

Didn't we hear this last year? Lol

Canon is not going to axe their best-selling camera series, hugely popular with amateurs and vloggers, and leave them with no viable alternative in the same price bracket. They would be throwing away their market share to Sony and Fuji.

If they are serious about dumping EOS M they need to be equally serious about providing an entry-level RF catalogue with a body and affordable lenses.

 

[Hector1970]

If you'd have asked me two years ago I'd have said the M series has no future once Canon brought out the RF mount. ie what was the point of two different mount types. What surprised me was the number of bodies and lens Canon made for the M series. They are very decent cameras, compact with good lens. I think they sell quite easily. I'd now be surprised Canon would stop making them. I think they could keep bringing out new models and more or less keep the same lens range and sell away.

 

[woodman411]

Didn't we hear this last year? Lol

Canon is not going to axe their best-selling camera series, hugely popular with amateurs and vloggers, and leave them with no viable alternative in the same price bracket. They would be throwing away their market share to Sony and Fuji.

If they are serious about dumping EOS M they need to be equally serious about providing an entry-level RF catalogue with a body and affordable lenses.

"Axe" meaning discontinue production? Probably not, they have shown they can continue producing old models for a long time, or tack on superficial updates to an old model like the M50II. "Axe" meaning discontinue development? Yes, happened a long time ago for EF-S lenses, the 90D will probably be the last crop DSLR, and we'll see about the M system. In the meantime, prices continue to drop for the full-frame RP, and they will probably incorporate the 1DX3's sensor in the RPII (or whatever they will call it) to achieve economies of scale to keep RP prices low.

 

[navastronia]

I support having a unified mount (RF) moving forward. I expect Canon has a strategy in mind for how to transition M users over to RF. This may include, as others have speculated, APS-C sensor RF cameras and APS-C size RF glass (RF-s???).

Forward!

 

[LDS]

canon sold less DSLR's during film then they do now.

also;

you get 0 sales and 0 profits when customers pick up and go to Sony or Fuji.
While profits are good, sales are also very much something stockholders look at. as well as marketshare.

I know. But back then they could intercept some of those sales with their P&S cameras, while now they are not in the phone market. And back in the film days it was a very different market, with film and development costs being part of users' expenses - which confined photography to a few "special events" for many, and mistakes were "expensive" - and the complexity higher. That put SLRs in a more narrow market. It's no surprise it was automated models like the Canon AE-1 to start bringing the SLR "to the masses", but mostly digital later, which removed the film and development costs, and allowed for correcting mistakes earlier.

In the past years they got used and built manufacturing capacity for a larger market - which now is shrinking, so they have to plan for it. The extensive range of many different models, mounts and lenses looks too expensive for the future. I'm not surprised they are looking for a costs-saving strategy.

I'm not saying this is the right strategy. I'm just saying from a manufacturing point of view they could see a single mount and more shared components a less risky way to plan for future models, while reducing costs. That strategy may win them more customers, lose some of them, or just keep the status quo. That all depends on what lenses and cameras they will deliver. and how they are accepted.

A mirrorless mount, even with a larger diameter that means not-so-small cameras allows for "rangefinder-like" lenses that can be both small and good - even for a full frame sensor - is Canon going to deliver them now? The RF lenses I saw till now are a different league - not good for a small compact camera.

Of course that would be a specific investment for a market segment that may not be large enough to repay it. Maybe they will go towards a less risky path, trying to deliver something they think should appeal the lower-end market, looking for a small camera with a kit zoom and little else. Just, IMHO that's the market phone makers aim too, especially since camera features are now among the few differentiating features among phone models, trying to justify their high prices. And they now have the fashion trends on their side, and the need to "publish immediately, who cares about careful culling and post-processing?"

That said, I liked the M line. I planned to buy a M5 MkII because I could not buy an M5 earlier, life events forbade me to invest money into a different system in the past two years and a half. Now it looks I should feel happy I didn't. Maybe Canon is overlooking a good niche market that will be occupied by the likes of Fuji, maybe that market won't exists in a few years. Maybe I'll get a view camera, eventually....

 

[Rocky]

With "APS-C size RF glass (RF-s???)" , the up grade to FF RF system is cripled. It will turn FF RF body into APS_C RF body.

 

[Richard CR]

Canon could easily produce an RF35mm pancake lens and a RF17-35mm zoom at reasonable prices and small size as well as a M body size R camera so would that suit your needs ?

there's no chance in hell that canon will produce a full frame 11-22 or a full frame 15-45mm the same size as the APS-C lenses, nor will they even be competitive against other brand's aps-c lenses.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Exactly, we see this sentiment over and over as if you simply cannot use a camera system for more than a few years? Rubbish. (Or is it, GAS is just too powerful and you have to have the latest?) 5D3 user here, lol.

No one likes to buy camera gear for thousands of dollars knowing that no updates will come ever again.

 

[Kane Clements]

I argued here some months ago that Canon had abandoned the low to high end enthusiast crop mirror less market. Whatever sales numbers are, the camera market is shrinking and it may well be they have weighed up R and D costs with margins on sales and decided to effectively abandon that segment. I moved from Canon because of their lack of commitment below R5 and R6.

It will be interesting to see how it all works out. Not well for a lot of users I would guess. Shame really.

 

[slclick]

No one likes to buy camera gear for thousands of dollars knowing that no updates will come ever again.

I have NEVER in 40 years bought a body or glass and wanted/needed an update but I shoot stills only but yeah, video folx need that shit I guess. Bummer if you do, lol. Try again

 

[SteveC]

I have NEVER in 40 years bought a body or glass and wanted/needed an update but I shoot stills only but yeah, video folx need that shit I guess. Bummer if you do, lol. Try again

A bit harsh there at the end, but your main point is good. I've never bought a camera hoping that five years down the line I'll be able to upgrade it. I suppose if I was to have articulated any hope, it's that the camera will last a long time so I don't have to spend money replacing it. (That being said I probably have more cameras right now than I "need" other than for "want a backup camera" paranoia. But that's not because of upgradeitis; they're all current models other than the M50.)

 

[Bob Howland]

I have NEVER in 40 years bought a body or glass and wanted/needed an update but I shoot stills only but yeah, video folx need that shit I guess. Bummer if you do, lol. Try again

Some of us have upgraded so many times that we've come to expect it. I went from an EOS-3 film body to a 10D DSLR, which I hated, to a 5D plus a 40D later. The 5D was replaced by a 5D3 which had a much better focusing system and the 40D was replaced by a used 7D after the older camera's shutter release became intermittent. This year I bought a 5Ds when Canon dropped the price by about 65% and the 7D may be replaced by an R7. I also replaced my entire f/2.8 trinity, all at least 15 years old, with an F/4 trinity which are all lighter and sharper and include IS. And last but certainly not least, my 100mm macro lens was replaced by a 70mm Sigma, a serious improvement.

 

[Dragon]

If Canon is going to kill off the EF-M mount, Canon should come up with a replacement system comparable in terms of size(lenses and camera) in R mount. Otherwise, the APS-C R mount may be DOA. People will go for the RP instead, except the birders.

Yep. 7D II owners are the only ones pushing for an APS-c R in the hopes that they will get the same kind of feature bargain they got on their 7DII. The problem is that an R5 with an APS-C sensor (which is what they are looking for) is going to sell for upwards of $2,500 and they won't be too thrilled with that and further, nobody else is going to buy it. I haven't heard one Rebel user say they wanted and APS-c R. Rebel users who wanted mirrorless either bought an M camera or moved to a different vendor.

 

[Dragon]

I am amazed at the number of people who keep saying there is no upgrade path from M to R like there was from EF-s to EF. Do these folks not know that EF-s lenses do not work on EF cameras? The only upgrade path that existed was if you had and EF-s camera and bought FF lenses, you could then use them on a FF camera. Other than the 7D II crowd, that list is very short. If Canon is really going to kill M, then they need to come up with an adapter that has some retrofocus glass in it to increase the backthrow so the M lenses can be used on an APS-C R.