New EOS M camera specifications [CR1]

Baron_Karza

EOS RP
Feb 17, 2019
343
410
If it has IBIS, same flip out screen like M50, no-crop 4K 60 with no overheating, then if the price is right, I'll get it instead of waiting for an R camera that has no overheating at 4K60.

If it does have overheat, I may get it anyway, as long as the cool down is no more than 15 minutes for at least a full 30 minute of continuous recording. And it can NOT have and reduction in record time from using non-video recording features (e.g., taking photos, changing settings, leaving camera on...)
 

Kane Clements

I'm New Here
Dec 6, 2019
19
21
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 don't know why you say the 15-45 gets a bad rap. On YOuTube Christopher frost did a head to head review and the 15-45 was superior to the old kit lens. I trust his lens reviews. Best on the internet.
 

koenkooi

EOS R
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,321
1,103
I don't know why you say the 15-45 gets a bad rap. On YOuTube Christopher frost did a head to head review and the 15-45 was superior to the old kit lens. I trust his lens reviews. Best on the internet.
People get wildly different results, which leads me to think there's a problem with consistency at the factory, one week perfect lenses, the other week soft and decentered lenses. I'm happy enough with my copy, but I'm not seeing much difference compared to the 18-55mm.
 

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,074
259
I know but none of them are great on the M6 sensor but at least they are huge and heavy.
As noted many times over the the last decade or so, optics hasn't improved as much as electronics, leading to the gap you've mentioned. That's one of the reasons I'm in no hurry to upgrade from the 5DmkIV to the R5 - even if I'll get a 50% improvement in sharpness, the glass will be that much heavier & pricier.

Between Canon's positioning of the EOS-M as light & compact, the shrinking market, and Canon's transition to the RF mount, I wouldn't bet a red cent on Canon releasing an EOS-M lens that sharp.
 

Kane Clements

I'm New Here
Dec 6, 2019
19
21
People get wildly different results, which leads me to think there's a problem with consistency at the factory, one week perfect lenses, the other week soft and decentered lenses. I'm happy enough with my copy, but I'm not seeing much difference compared to the 18-55mm.
Fair point well made. I wasn't aware of that. Mine was a lovely lens.

I wonder about Canon's quality control sometimes. Consistency in 90D production was possibly not as it might have been. Some of the issues might have origins in the new 32 Mb sensor, yet some users seem to have experienced problems. I had one for a while and it was a pig. I micro focussed my 100-400 Mk II to death on the body and could never get consistent results. In the end I returned it and got an RP. At which point the 100-400 started behaving itself! :rolleyes:

I wonder what that was all about? Not!
 

ctk

I'm New Here
Mar 25, 2020
21
25
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.
18-xx is no sale for me, I need a standard zoom to cover 24mm EFL on the wide end and probably 60-70mm EFL on the long end. And it's gotta be good for landscapes/architecture at the wide end (i.e. sharp corner to corner, at least stopped down)

Something like a 15-45 F/2-2.8 IS would be perfect, though even a 15-45 F/4 with decent IQ and QC would be enough to win me over.
 

Pierre Lagarde

Canon, Nikon and So on ...
Aug 4, 2020
29
39
France
www.deviantart.com
...

12 fps isn't going to wow people when the M6 Mark II shoots 14. Yes, that may be shutter priority, but EVERYONE markets their fps on shutter priority. The thing even shoots up to 30 fps in a crop mode. With AF. This has to at least match the M6 II on marketable specifications if not exceed it, and it doesn't seem to be doing that.
...
Valid points.
Though, even if I admit it's probably a very personal view, I would vastly prefer they give us back the ability to shoot bursts with finger on screen, like it was possible to do with the first M6 iteration, and only 10FPS. I don't understand why they removed this feature on M6II ?
Combined with a better AF operation, it would be fantastic on such a compact set.
 

canonnews

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2017
753
1,203
Canada
www.canonnews.com
I don't know why you say the 15-45 gets a bad rap. On YOuTube Christopher frost did a head to head review and the 15-45 was superior to the old kit lens. I trust his lens reviews. Best on the internet.
except that the copy variation is WILD with the 15-45. he must have lucked with a good copy, and seen an pink unicorn as well.
 

canonnews

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2017
753
1,203
Canada
www.canonnews.com
As noted many times over the the last decade or so, optics hasn't improved as much as electronics, leading to the gap you've mentioned. That's one of the reasons I'm in no hurry to upgrade from the 5DmkIV to the R5 - even if I'll get a 50% improvement in sharpness, the glass will be that much heavier & pricier.

Between Canon's positioning of the EOS-M as light & compact, the shrinking market, and Canon's transition to the RF mount, I wouldn't bet a red cent on Canon releasing an EOS-M lens that sharp.
The 32mm F1.4 waves at you. it resolves *more* than the 32.5MP sensor and AA filter can do in the center, and easily outresolves the 24mp sensor. it outresolves the 24MP .. wide.. freaking.. open.

I suspect if they do a 50-55mm EF-M it will do the same as the 32mm. Canon has it nicely dialed in with those optics.
 

hachu21

EOS M6 Mark II
Feb 11, 2014
93
18
The 32mm F1.4 waves at you. it resolves *more* than the 32.5MP sensor and AA filter can do in the center, and easily outresolves the 24mp sensor. it outresolves the 24MP .. wide.. freaking.. open.

I suspect if they do a 50-55mm EF-M it will do the same as the 32mm. Canon has it nicely dialed in with those optics.
I can confirm that the 32mm can be used @1.4 without any concern on my M6 mk1. As sharp or sharper corner to corner than 22 f/2.
Unfortunately, I can't say that for the EF 50 1.8 or the EF 50 1.4 that I both had.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,606
1,455
Good info on the 15-45 from people, thanks. I basically found it too constraining a range for a walk-around lens and hardly ever used it. (I found a used Tamron EF mount 18-200 and adapted it, eventually springing for a new native EF mount version.)

I said it got a bad rap (meaning from other users), not that I personally had had a bad experience with it--I just have had no use for the thing. I may, for all I know, have one of the good ones. I certainly didn't want ANOTHER one as a kit when I bought the M6-II (and the other alternative was also a range covered by my Tammy), but found I was slightly better off getting that kit (to get the viewfinder) then turning around and selling the 15-45. (If Canon doesn't like people doing that with their kits they can damned well offer M6-II plus viewfinder and no lenses as a kit. I know some of their retailers actually asked them why the hell they don't do that and got no real answer.) I *do* actually have a couple of the primes and the wide zoom (11-22? something like that)--I skipped the 28mm macro.
 

Rocky

EOS R
Jul 30, 2010
955
56
I also have both the 15-45 and the 18-55 EF-M. Optically, both are about the same. Good enough for not too critical use. I found that the 15-45 is more versatile for the "shot and run tourist". Before I got the 15-45, I need to do a lot of stiches on scenery. The 18mm is just not wide enough. Even the 15-45 looks cheap and all plastic. It survived 3 days outside shooting at about 5 degree C., with rain and snow all day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974
Aug 18, 2020
2
0
Whilst the body will have to grow a bit to accommodate those features I'm not sure Canon is doing anything other than playing catch up with Sony and Fuji.

I recently sold my M50 and I'm looking for a crop frame mirrorless camera to complement my RP.

Currently the favourite to win the race is the Fuji X-T4. Which has all those features, great weather sealing (big issue for me) and overall build quality. Plus with a Viltrox adaptor I can use most of my Canon glass. The X-T4 has the size and weight to balance EF glass.

Canon has a huge lens range and maintains enviable brand loyalty. Trouble is they seem over the years to have taken it rather for granted and they are struggling to catch up. And not always making the best job of it. (The 90D springs to mind as a rather flawed stop gap that would have been better as a mirrorless camera in an RP size body).
Totally agree! if the new M is to worth something, it has at least to be competitive with the Fuji X-T4.
 

Baron_Karza

EOS RP
Feb 17, 2019
343
410
I also have both the 15-45 and the 18-55 EF-M. Optically, both are about the same. Good enough for not too critical use. I found that the 15-45 is more versatile for the "shot and run tourist". Before I got the 15-45, I need to do a lot of stiches on scenery. The 18mm is just not wide enough. Even the 15-45 looks cheap and all plastic. It survived 3 days outside shooting at about 5 degree C., with rain and snow all day.
It died on the 4th day??
 

Rocky

EOS R
Jul 30, 2010
955
56
It died on the 4th day??
It did not die at all. right after that, I use it for the rest of the trip for an other month, no problem. That was one and a half years ago. It was on the M50. I am still using both of them now. I did not change the lens in those 3 days
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baron_Karza

Baron_Karza

EOS RP
Feb 17, 2019
343
410
It did not die at all. right after that, I use it for the rest of the trip for an other month, no problem. That was one and a half years ago. It was on the M50. I am still using both of them now. I did not change the lens in those 3 days
sweet
 

scottw

I'm New Here
Aug 30, 2018
11
6
photographybanzai.com
Camera development takes time. This rumored spec list looks like a direct response to the Fujifilm X-T2 and later models. This feels like the strongest reason Canon would actually make a camera like this besides wanting to make an actual upgrade to the M5.

The main thing I'm wanting right now is a physically larger and higher quality viewfinder compared to the one in the M5 and M50. I've gotten into using old film era glass, so the EVF on the M5 and M50 do feel a bit lacking compared to what else is out there.

Comments on rumored specs:
  • I do want dual card slots. I miss having that feature from when I used Nikon DSLRs. Given how Canon has handled dual slots on the R5/R6 we can't expect duplication of video files, which is a bit disappointing, but duplication of photos would be great at least.
  • IBIS... great. Definitely a nice addition. Helpful with current EF-M glass that tends to be on the slower end.
  • DPAF II... also great. Better AF is always nice. Hopefully they come in with new lenses to go along with even faster AF compared to the M6 Mark II.
  • 12 fps? Seems odd if the M6 Mark II is rated 14 max.
  • 4k60 and 1080p120 seem good at face value, but I'm not expecting much given Canon's latest situation with the R5/R6 and what the M6 Mark II can do. CLog would be nice too, but another wait and see. downsampled and 10-bit would be things to cause overheating due to added data requirements.
 

Bob Howland

EOS RP
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2012
549
148
To change the subject, I'm not a vlogger and don't want to become one, but I have to wonder: using only Canon equipment, how would one construct a "perfect" vlogging camera? Maybe Canon sees the M cameras partly as their entries to the vlogging world, a world for which R cameras and lenses are just too big.