New EOS M camera specifications [CR1]

[blackcoffee17]

I have all the above and I'm tempted to get the Sigma 16mm as well in case going abroad for a vacation becomes a realistic option again. Let's see what happens first, the pandemic ending or having all my kids potty trained

Yes, i want the Sigma 16 1.4 also. Should be great for low light photography / astro.
Maybe Canon will come out with that 15mm F2 this year.

 

[Richard CR]

You mean like the M6II/90D release: same internals like the sensor, digic, card slot, but different externals.

I'm not sure what Canon could offer in a future M camera the next few years to make me replace the M6II, I specifically bought it to have no EVF I bet in a year or 2 we'll get an M400 with a fast sensor, IBIS and DPAF II, that would be very tempting, I still like the original M body the most. The M6II is both too big and too small for my liking. M+22mm fit in a coat pocket, M6II+22mm not so much.

Yeah you almost need two M's .. I do miss the compactness of the original M.

But why not? they did it with the 80D and 90D and the EOS-M's why not carry that forward to the R line? No one lost their minds over the 90D and M6 Mark II, and the M5 and the 80D.

 

[jolyonralph]

A high end EOS M, as much as I want one, is rather pointless without high end M lenses.

HUGE number of easily adaptable EF lenses out there. Chances are you may already have one or two. This will work amazingly with lenses such as the EF 100-400L II

Just because there are new RF lenses doesn't mean the EF lenses have suddenly vanished.

 

[jolyonralph]

New DIGIC Processor

Maybe this simply means "new for the M series", which hasn't had a DIGIC X processor yet. OR perhaps a DIGIC 9 as a simplified DIGIC X with smaller cache, etc.

 

[Upeo]

Maybe this simply means "new for the M series", which hasn't had a DIGIC X processor yet. OR perhaps a DIGIC 9 as a simplified DIGIC X with smaller cache, etc.

If I'm not mistaken, both the DIGIC 7 and 8 were introduced on cropped sensor cameras before going to the full frame ones so it really wouldn't be surprising to see an entirely new processor here that they'll then scale up.

 

[idahobill]

This must be the new M7 spec. It seems to incorporate all the advances of the R6 to the M series. Same shutter speed and DPAF II points to similar spec’d processor.
If they maintain the size of an M50, and release new M lenses, it will be a very good camera.

 

[geffy]

They will sell a shedload of these I have three M cameras on the go and all have a niche, from a fixed fisheye to the 22 on an old m with a viewfinder for street, i am not a lens changer and this body sounds a winner

 

[Czardoom]

As a M6 II owner, you could not be more wrong about the "too big and too heavy" comment. I've had 400 2.8 on it and my 100-400 II just about lives on the adapter. It just works and just isnt an issue.

Why do people keep saying this when actual owners keep say "Wait up a sec here...."

Because a lot of other owners of M camera owners say, "No way I can use EF or EF-S lenses on my M. They are an ergonomic nightmare!" I am one of those owners and sold my EF and EF-S lenses when I bought my M5. I found only M series lenses were a good fit. Sure, you can put big and heavy lenses on your M camera with the adapter, but that completely defeats the purpose of having a tiny camera that is easy to carry around. The camera is way too light for balance and the grip way too small for one handed carry and shooting. I'm not talking huge telephotos here - because they are big and heavy on every camera. So, yes, something like the 400mm will actually be less different than some thing more mid-size.

So, yes, for many M series owners, it is an issue.

 

[jolyonralph]

If I'm not mistaken, both the DIGIC 7 and 8 were introduced on cropped sensor cameras before going to the full frame ones so it really wouldn't be surprising to see an entirely new processor here that they'll then scale up.

I think there's a reason they went from DIGIC 8 to DIGIC X, and that's because they knew the DIGIC 9 would come later.

 

[ctk]

I hope this isn't too expensive (>$1300) and I hope they make a premium 15-xx zoom to go with it.

 

[SteveC]

I hope this isn't too expensive (>$1300) and I hope they make a premium 15-xx zoom to go with it.

The present-day 15-45 gets a pretty bad rap--apparently before I bought my M-50 there was an 18-55 EF-M lens that was considerably better. I'm not sure whether that's actually discontinued or not.

 

[idahobill]

I hope this isn't too expensive (>$1300) and I hope they make a premium 15-xx zoom to go with it.

I would think this spec'd camera would be in that range. It appears like essentially an R6 with an APC sensor in a small form factor.

 

[Sibir Lupus]

The EOS M5 Mark II/M7 rumors are starting to shape up into what sounds like a kickass little camera . For the processor, it'll likely be a lower Mhz DIGIC X or possibly a new DIGIC 9 processor. Either way, I hope they add animal eye AF as that feature already looks incredibly helpful on the R5 and R6.

Its just a bit weird to have a $1500 camera and the only standard zoom you can mount on it is a $100 plastic 15-45...

There is already a rumor that a "higher end" EF-M kit lens will launch along side the M5 Mark II/M7 when it comes out later this year. I'm sure it'll come as one of the bundled packages, as the current 15-45mm kit lens just doesn't cut it on a 32MP sensor.

 

[Sibir Lupus]

The present-day 15-45 gets a pretty bad rap--apparently before I bought my M-50 there was an 18-55 EF-M lens that was considerably better. I'm not sure whether that's actually discontinued or not.

The EF-M 18-55mm lens has been discontinued (last bundled with the EOS M3), as the 15-45mm lens replaced it. Though there some places where you can still buy it new. While the 18-55mm lens had better build quality (metal exterior and mount), some tests online show the 15-45mm lens is actually a little sharper then the 18-55mm lens when paired with an EOS M camera using the 24MP sensor.

 

[blackcoffee17]

The present-day 15-45 gets a pretty bad rap--apparently before I bought my M-50 there was an 18-55 EF-M lens that was considerably better. I'm not sure whether that's actually discontinued or not.

I had both the 18-55 and 15-45. I would say the 15-45 is at least as good (at least my copy). It's quite sharp in the center of the image and soft in the corners (not so important) but images just look a bit flat and dull. Its a bit too much for the 32MP sensor.
The 15-45 is cheaply built but quite solid and IS is very efficient. There is still place for a better lens, every other system has a more premium standard lens.

 

[SteveC]

I had both the 18-55 and 15-45. I would say the 15-45 is at least as good (at least my copy). It's quite sharp in the center of the image and soft in the corners (not so important) but images just look a bit flat and dull. Its a bit too much for the 32MP sensor.
The 15-45 is cheaply built but quite solid and IS is very efficient. There is still place for a better lens, every other system has a more premium standard lens.

Unfortunately since you (apparently) typoed in one of your two paragraphs, I'm not sure which one is your comment concerning the 18-55.

But I agree, the system really needs a better standard zoom.

I've been using a native EF-M Tamron 18-200 without trouble (many people have had difficulty with it) on the M50 and now the M6-II as my sort of general purpose camera. It's a bit fatter than 61mm but not so fat as to look ridiculous.

But then again, I've been known to stick an EF adapter on the thing and go to town with a 100-400 II L, also. (In fact I think I posted a zoo pic of a snow leopard using that setup.)

 

[blackcoffee17]

Unfortunately since you (apparently) typoed in one of your two paragraphs, I'm not sure which one is your comment concerning the 18-55.

But I agree, the system really needs a better standard zoom.

I've been using a native EF-M Tamron 18-200 without trouble (many people have had difficulty with it) on the M50 and now the M6-II as my sort of general purpose camera. It's a bit fatter than 61mm but not so fat as to look ridiculous.

But then again, I've been known to stick an EF adapter on the thing and go to town with a 100-400 II L, also. (In fact I think I posted a zoo pic of a snow leopard using that setup.)

Someone said the 18-55 is better. I commented that i had both the 18-55 and the 15-45 and i think the 15-45 is at least as good if not better than the 18-55 but neither are great, just OK.

 

[amfoto1]

Whenever I'm travelling, if I find a camera store and try and stop in. None of them have ever had a single EOS M camera to show me. I'm intrigued by their size and could adapt my EF glass to it. But not willing to buy one sight unseen. I know they are bigger sellers outside of the US, so maybe less of an issue there. Just makes me wonder how committed to this market Canon really is. Seems like quite committed, given the amount of development still going on.

Brian

I picked up a used M5 a couple months ago and have been having fun with it. Only cost around $300 US (~ $350 after tax, shipping), in really nice condition (open box demo unit). 90 day warranty, 14 day no-questions-asked right of return. What can go wrong?

Really like the EVF, I'm using with 4 manual focus lenses (12mm f/2.8, 21mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.1 & 90mm f/2.5 macro. I'll probably get some AF primes sometime, I've gotten lazy and struggling with manual focus a bit.

I really wanted an EVF... not an add-on like M6 Mk II. Only M5 & M50 have that. Also wanted dedicated Exposure Compensation dual, which M5 has, but other M-series don't.

Very compact, light weight, even with lenses... Especially compared to Canon 7D series & 5D series DSLRs I use for work (all with battery grips & often big telephotos up to 8 lb. 500mm).

The little M5 is just plain fun, by comparison. The only thing I don't like is the small battery that the EVF drains quickly... Maybe 200 to 400 shots at best. I bought a spare LP-E17 along with the camera. No battery grips avail. for M series, either.

If you are comfortable with Canon DSLRS, you will probably like an M50 or M5. If you never use accessory flash, M6 Mk II sounds great with it's auxiliary EVF (that goes in the hot shoe, so can't use flash at the same time).

 

[SteveC]

Whenever I'm travelling, if I find a camera store and try and stop in. None of them have ever had a single EOS M camera to show me. I'm intrigued by their size and could adapt my EF glass to it. But not willing to buy one sight unseen. I know they are bigger sellers outside of the US, so maybe less of an issue there. Just makes me wonder how committed to this market Canon really is. Seems like quite committed, given the amount of development still going on.

Brian

That's interesting because I bought my M50 and M6-II both from my local brick and mortar.

Not only that, but just yesterday I watched them sell an M6 (not even an M6-II) to somebody, and they also sold him the adapter. Not sure if he bought any lenses; I got the impression he has quite a few EF lenses.

 

[ashmadux]

Almost all of the RF lenses are way too large to work well with the M bodies. Even the adapted EF-S 17-55 is comically oversized. What would be ideal would be weather-sealed, high-quality EF-M lenses.

Efs 10-22 and the Ef 35 f2 IS work fantastic. Been using them for years. I'm wondering if I should purchase a m6 right now or wait ... until ????

The eye af is a very big deal like Ibis...I wish it was coming soon I would hold off. Literally want to Purchase NOW