M5 now dead?


EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 6, 2016
Moscow, Russia
That is very disappointing to hear. I mean about things that there will be no EOS M5 Mark II.
I'm focused on APS-C mirrorless ILC's now, and I want top of the line Canon camera, but M6 Mark II is not what I will buy, because it doesn't have integrated EVF.
Well, I'll have to wait till M50 Mark II then...or maybe Canon will make an EOS-M version of 7D Mark II replacement. If so, I'll buy it immediately.


Dec 17, 2013
I still don't believe it. I think it's coming in 2020. Now, that said, it's not going to be the 7D3 in any way...but, still a mighty fine travel body I'm hoping.
Nov 16, 2019
Besides tastes changing about EVFs due to cell phone culture, it may be that touch-and-drag AF has influenced this decision. It's more practical with the removable EVF than with a built in. The removable one sticks back further than you'd want a built-in to. Now my face isn't in the way, and doesn't accidentally move the the AF point.


CR Pro
Jul 19, 2011
Sanpete: I had to disable the Touch & drag AF (under the red menu, "Touch & drag AF settings). Now, I'm not moving the AF point with my nose by accident when looking through the viewfinder, but can still touch on the screen to set the AF point where I want it.

OneSnark: My solution, such as it is, to the slow M zooms is to carry both zooms and primes. For travel, I put my 18-55 and 55-200 Ms on the shelf and bought the 18-150. I have the 22 and the 32. And the 11-22. I recently returned from a river cruise where I carried both of my M-5s, the 11-22 and 18-150, 22, 32 and 70-300L (on adapter) in a little sling bag. During the day, most of the lenses stayed on the ship. The 18-150 was adequate as a walk around lens. In towns where buildings were close, I brought the 11-22 and maybe one of the primes (in vest pockets or a little fanny pack). Where I expected lower light (inside buildings, etc.) I brought the 18-150 for outside and brought one of the primes (usually the 32) for inside. The 70-300L never got off the ship, but worked well for castles perched on the rocks above the Rhine. The point being that the size of the M lenses makes it possible to carry a wide range of lenses without straining your back. I understand you might want faster lenses for purposes other than light. But for me, the point of the M system is something I can carry on vacations with my wife, catch some acceptable snaps on the way and not be weighed down with gear. I read somewhere on this forum that making faster M zooms would result in substantially larger lenses. So that using adapted EF lenses probably makes sense. For my kit, I could carry either of the 70-200Ls in place of the 70-300 (not that I have both). Or any of the 2.8 EF zooms (again, my EF zooms are 4.0s, but you get the point). But, if you added many of them, you would rapidly lose the point of the M system's compactness and light weight. Choices always.